Medicaid expansion is a bad deal for Georgians
Amid the confusion about who won what in the Supreme Court’s Obamacare ruling last month, there was one clear winner: the states.
When Georgia and a couple of dozen other states joined Florida’s lawsuit to overturn the 2010 health-care reform, they were contesting the part of the law that affected their governments: the Medicaid provisions. Obamacare called for expanding Medicaid to cover anyone earning up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level; it aimed to force states to go along with this plan by threatening to withhold current Medicaid funding if they didn’t acquiesce.
The states argued this coercion was unconstitutional, and seven of nine Supreme Court justices agreed with them. Instead of striking down the provision altogether, however, the court offered a remedy: Washington couldn’t take away what it’s now giving states for Medicaid, but states could choose whether to participate in the expansion.
That’s left some governors — including our own Nathan Deal — wondering if they should stay out of the program, or join it to catch the billions of federal dollars that would flow to them. It really isn’t that tough a question. Deal should tell the feds thanks, but no thanks.
First and foremost, Medicaid is already a program of limited effectiveness. Its promise of health care for the poor is somewhat theoretical: In a national survey conducted before the court’s ruling for Alpharetta-based Jackson Healthcare, one in four doctors said they won’t see Medicaid patients, and one in three said they won’t accept new Medicaid patients. In Georgia, 42 percent said they refuse new Medicaid patients.
The reason some Medicaid patients have trouble finding a doctor is the program’s low reimbursement rates, which in some cases are below the cost of providing the care. The expansion to 138 percent of the federal poverty level — from the current 42 percent, or less, for most adults in Georgia — is essentially a gamble that doctors can be duped into thinking they might lose money on each Medicaid patient, but they can make it up in volume.
In the first year, according to state estimates, we would add more than 500,000 people to the 1.8 million Georgians already covered by Medicaid (putting one in four Georgians on Medicaid — and stretching the definition of “safety net”). A likely result is even fewer doctors will accept Medicaid patients, making matters worse for Georgians already in the program.
In what sense is that the “fair” thing to do?
What’s more, the expansion is also a bad gamble for taxpayers.
The salient number here is not $35 billion, which is the estimated amount Washington would chip in toward Georgia’s Medicaid expansion between 2014 and 2023. It’s $4.5 billion, the minimum amount this move would cost Georgia taxpayers in those years.
I say “minimum” because that’s the best-case scenario: It assumes the feds keep their word and fund the expansion fully in the first years, declining to 90 percent of the cost by 2020. Washington already borrows more than a trillion dollars a year, with both Social Security and Medicare due to push Uncle Sam even further in debt, so it’s very possible the federal match will decline further.
If it hits 80 percent, that’s more than $1 billion a year by 2020. If it hits 60 percent, which is the current level, that’s more than $2 billion a year from state coffers. That’s money that can’t go to roads, schools or — pass the smelling salts — taxpayers.
By comparison, Georgia just started a 2013 budget year in which it will spend $19.3 billion in state funds.
Even if state lawmakers were inclined to spend an extra billion or two on health care, they’d be wise to avoid the golden handcuffs of a Medicaid expansion. Take the feds’ money and you have to follow the feds’ rules, forever and ever, amen. Turn it down, and that money could go toward lower-cost catastrophic coverage for the same uninsured, mostly young, adults.
Finally, if Georgia and enough other states turn down the Medicaid expansion, it just might force Congress to make more rational, effective arrangements for the program. Block-granting Medicaid funds to states is one possibility. Another is the grand swap proposed by Sen. Lamar Alexander: Washington takes over Medicaid completely and passes k-12 education totally to the states.
Any way you slice it, the Medicaid expansion was a bad enough deal to push Georgia to fight it in court. Now that we’ve won, let’s accept the victory and move on.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
447 comments Add your comment
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
July 12th, 2012
7:06 am
The reason some Medicaid patients have trouble finding a doctor is the program’s low reimbursement rates, which in some cases are below the cost of providing the care. The expansion to 138 percent of the federal poverty level — from the current 42 percent, or less, for most adults in Georgia — is essentially a gamble that doctors can be duped into thinking they might lose money on each Medicaid patient, but they can make it up in volume.
So if you lose money on every patient but you see more of them you might break even? Is dummycrat math mandatory for all of us now?
No wonder we are in such trouble.
Willis
July 12th, 2012
7:20 am
What you left out is that people without insurance and those already on Medicaid go to hospital emergency rooms where they will be seen, and hospitalized, if necessary. When they don’t pay, the cost is passed on to the rest of us in higher charges and higher insurance premiums.
So go ahead – keep your head in the sand if you wish – but health care and the cost of that care are not going to be able to be ignored.
Skip
July 12th, 2012
7:21 am
How bout a 35th vote, think that will fix things?
Jm
July 12th, 2012
7:40 am
Agree
In particular because it is a one way trip
AU Liberal in ATL
July 12th, 2012
7:40 am
Just let ‘em die. Right, Kyle. As long as they are not you or your family, just let them die.
swga
July 12th, 2012
7:41 am
Providing basic healthcare is just the right thing to do. All other industrialized countries have some sort of health care plan. The money spent on healthcare largely goes into salaries, and thus is recirculated back into the community, a tremendous economic stimulus. Medicaid expansion will help keep your local hospital open for you, too.
Some People are stupid
July 12th, 2012
7:53 am
I Report-
So if you lose money on every patient but you see more of them you might break even? Is dummycrat math mandatory for all of us now?
Thanks for shooting your theory of “if you lower rates for everyone, but more people pay, you take in more money”
carlosgvv
July 12th, 2012
7:59 am
Georgia and other states have spent untold millions in legal fees fighting Obamacare. Protecting the interests of their Big Business sponsors means everything to them. Protecting the jobs of policemen and women, firefighters and teachers, just to name a few, obviously means nothing to them.
It’s clear the “victory” here is not for the people.
Why do conservatives continue to support politicians that make it crystal clear they could not possibly care less about the people.
sirwinston
July 12th, 2012
8:02 am
Medical professions are always thinking about how much they will lose from potential patients who has money; or what they can bill the insurance companies. People have to have a way to pay for medical insurance and while all of the politicians having their hands in the bucket with the medical professions seeking to overturn this or that, it is wrong, it is very, very sad that those who seek to disturb things that keep us safe that it put all of its time in making things the way they want it! Once you get down and out, who do you turn to, when you can’t afford this who do you turn to and then who do you talk about it. Damn if hedo and damn if he don’t. This had nothing to do with the President, its been on the table for you, me, your kid, and family members for years…………you who are trying to overturn or stop it are merely looking at your pockets that the cash won’t continue to flow the way it has been. Stop lacking in your duties and help keep america safe by ensuring insurance for healthcare prevail. You never know when potential “outbreak” will hit america and you will be right in the center of it and it will affect your families just as it will affect ours! We need for America Citizens to have some healthcare somehow! If this fails, when an outbreak hit us……..will you blame Obamacare? Yes……….I think you would be the first one’s!
Ayn Rant
July 12th, 2012
8:06 am
Bad for which Georgians? For those who need health care, but can’t afford the insurance premiums or the out-of-pocket expense? For those who pay the cost of indigent emergency room expenses through their medical insurance premiums?
Aren’t poor Georgians, which are 30% of the population, people just as much as corporations and the ultra-rich, and just as deserving of government subsidies?
Yeh, the way Americans pay for health care is a mess, but less of a mess under the Affordable Health Care Act. Since no elected politician has the guts to expunge the useless, parasitic health care insurers and lawyers from the health care process, Romney/ObamaCare is the best we can do.
Atlanta Mom
July 12th, 2012
8:08 am
Kyle,
You made it clear on your TSplost blog, if it doesn’t benefit you personally, you don’t vote for it. You have a job and health insurance, so why would support health care for someone who doesn’t have any?
jconservative
July 12th, 2012
8:09 am
Willis at 7:20 has it right.
And I see nothing wrong with the national health plan we have had for the past 25 years. Anyone, citizen, non-citizen, legal, illegal, in the United States who is sick can go to a hospital and receive medical care. The system takes care of the charges if that person can not, or will not, pay. Universal health care.
But don’t thank me, thank President Reagan who signed the bill into law. It’s part of the Republican Party’s gift to the American welfare state.
I agree with Kyle, pass on the expansion of Medicaid.
@@
July 12th, 2012
8:21 am
Government rarely thinks things thru to their logical conclusion. They operate under the assumption that their audience is captive.
I wonder why.
If doctors choose not to operate in a state where medicaid expansion takes place, they move to a state where they’re not overburdened. Medicaid patients can do the same.
JDW
July 12th, 2012
8:25 am
Kyle is against implementing the health care plan to take care of our citizens in need. Color me :shocked: …not.
I have a better idea, lets charge the ones that are on Medicare today…at 42% of the poverty level a family of four makes about $9700 a YEAR. Wow they must be rolling in dough. Just so happens I have insurance for a family of four. Blue Cross Blue Shield $2500 deductible per person. It only costs about $9000 a year so they will have $700 a year left. Why that’s more than someone in say…Haiti, Chad or Uganda. Of course then we will have to fork out to move the bodies from the street but I am sure that will be ok with the Republicans.
JDW
July 12th, 2012
8:29 am
O’ and Kyle…Medicare Expansion isn’t a bad deal for anyone in Georgia. The doctors that want to participate will and the people that are helped will have somewhere to go. Only people it’s a bad deal for is those that stay up at night worrying that someone might get a penny’s worth of help from the…gasp…GOVERNMENT…you know the one BY THE PEOPLE AND FOR THE PEOPLE.
Old timer
July 12th, 2012
8:46 am
Good points Kyle…
colin micheals
July 12th, 2012
8:47 am
Shame on you! Get down on your knees and thank God you do not have a child with a life threatening preexisting condition (as I do). No one who does could ever be against the new healthcare law. It will save millions of lives. It will save billions of dollars also because people will be covered instead of being forced to go to the ER for help. It will save our hospital’s budgets. It provides free preventative services which will also save lives. Until you have a child who is very ill or withe a dire condition for which they need health insurance, you need to keep you mouth closed on this matter. And as I said, get down on your knees and thank God.
SBinF
July 12th, 2012
8:49 am
“I got mine, you get yours however you can, just don’t ask me to pay for it!”
Just like Jesus would do.
Old timer
July 12th, 2012
8:50 am
I think there are better..free market, open exchange between states, ways to offer insurance to poor.
Bob Loblaw
July 12th, 2012
8:52 am
Kyle, you have no answer for those uninsured and in all candor, you sound ignorant. GA has a huge population that’s uninsured and a huge Medicaid population. GA can’t do away with Medicaid, so we’re stuck with it. Adding the newly eligible 600k people to the rolls will inject folks that are healthier into the risk pool. More money would be eligible to pay providers. Those 600k don’t have insurance and hardly make enough money to buy gas to get to work and back. They won’t buy insurance. So they’ll show up at the ER, sicker than if they would have seen a primary care doc early on and cost YOU and everyone else with insurance (lucky you) more in premiums. Or, you can add 600k people to Medicaid, draw down 100% of the costs for a few years and then with the risk pool strengthened and more money in the program, have a more stable Medicaid program.
It frankly seems like you’ve borrowed someone’s opinion on this one and copied it. You’re not in Hartford, buddy. This is Georgia. We have poor people. Act like you care. You offered zero in terms of solutions to covering working people who can’t afford health insurance.
killerj
July 12th, 2012
8:53 am
Its good that they are changing the by laws in this country,lets hash it out and see where it leads,I will hold my ire for now,big brother can,t even pay for what they have in place now let alone promise more in the future.
curious
July 12th, 2012
8:53 am
I bet the hospitals would rather get the medicaid payment rather than nothing.
It’s amazing how selfish people are.
Kyle. go join the military and do something for your Country.
politicdiscourse.com
July 12th, 2012
9:00 am
Either way we pay.
Without Obamacare, the insured will continue to pay higher premiums to for-profit insurance companies.
With Obamacare, the already insured will pay higher taxes in order to provide health insurance for Americans that cannot afford it.
The issue boils down to who you are more comfortable financially supporting–the parasites at the bottom of the economic food chain or those at the top.
Welcome to American politics.
DawgDad
July 12th, 2012
9:03 am
Around Memorial Day Illinois, a pillar of socialism in America, was cutting $6-7 BILLION dollars from its Medicaid program, which aside from being off-the-charts ironic was producing all the anticipated cries of anguish from the leaders on the left, at least from those who weren’t responsible for funding the program. Medicaid in its current form is unsustainable, and all the demagoguery in the world can’t change the facts.The same people who scream about the insured picking up health care costs for the uninsured seemingly have no problem when it comes to the unfunded portion of Medicaid expense and want to EXPAND the coverage. Stupid is . . .
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
July 12th, 2012
9:03 am
Love how christians let dollars and cents trump the health of their neighbors time and time again.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
July 12th, 2012
9:05 am
passes k-12 education totally to the states.
Then we can correct the spelling to what it should be: reedin, rightin, and rithmetic!
And we can leave any mention of slavery or injuns out of our history books!
md
July 12th, 2012
9:14 am
“I say “minimum” because that’s the best-case scenario: It assumes the feds keep their word and fund the expansion fully in the first years, declining to 90 percent of the cost by 2020. ”
And unless I’m mistaken, those figures only cover the actual costs of service….not the additional costs for administration and maintenance of program for ever and ever……..
What all the bleeding hearts above seem to not understand is many of the States are balanced budget states…….which means all these additional costs have to come from somewhere…..these are the same people that are currently screaming about the cuts to education………
Ok then……what are you going to cut to provide these services to the “poor”…..and I put that in parenthesis because many of those “poor” choose to be poor……if one doesn’t think so, just go find a gangbanger somewhere and ask them what they are doing to better themselves……..
md
July 12th, 2012
9:16 am
“Just like Jesus would do.”
That cunard is getting a bit stale……as he’d more than likely tell those choosing to drop out of our education programs to get their act together and quit mooching when they just chose to skip an opportunity.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 12th, 2012
9:17 am
The best way to sum up this Medicaid scam from Obamacare is in the immortal words of J Wellington Wimpy, who proclaimed: “I’ll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today”.
Even better, how about the “Lucy holding the football for Charlie Brown” analogy? Yeah, we’ll buy into your system at THIS rate of reimbursement, pretty much figuring out that you’re going to reduce it in later years leaving us to hold your bag once again. Fortunately for us, the voters and elected officials in Georgia aren’t as trusting as Charlie Brown.
Add to that, you gotta love the libs on here falling all over the DNC talking points about how all those sick people without insurance are causing rates to skyrocket, yet when it comes to discussing the tax increase for those uninsured people, they are quick to exclaim, “But it’s less than 1% of the people!”
The uninsured are a huge burden on our health care system, until it comes time to make them pay the bill, apparently.
Is there any wonder why we can’t believe a thing they say?
md
July 12th, 2012
9:18 am
“So they’ll show up at the ER, sicker than if they would have seen a primary care doc early on and cost YOU and everyone else with insurance (lucky you) more in premiums.”
I see this one a lot, but the math just doesn’t add up………a few trips to the er will cost about the same if not more than many trips to the doc……it’s a wash.
JF McNamara
July 12th, 2012
9:21 am
There’s only one problem with your assertion that people won’t be able to get care on medicaid. You assume that everything is static. If there are people with medicaid who can’t get care, then some entrepreneurial person will find a way to cut costs and provide care. That’s the free market. It will happen, because there is too much money to be made that way. I’m not worried about that at all.
The money part of it is debatable. That’s the good thing about doing something. Some States will probably we winners while others are losers. At least we can finally see what works and what doesn’t and (hopefully) all migrate to the right solution along the way.
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
9:23 am
Willis @ 7:20: “people without insurance and those already on Medicaid go to hospital emergency rooms where they will be seen, and hospitalized, if necessary”
If this is a problem among the uninsured and Medicaid patients, how does expanding Medicaid without addressing its flaws solve the problem?
All the talk about “we pay through higher insurance premiums” rings hollow, too, when the alternative is … paying through higher taxes.
The problem many people on the left have is that they choose to believe anyone who disagrees with their methods disagrees with their goals. This is a particularly bad problem for them when their methods have failed to achieve their goals.
Personally, I’d rather try something else. And sinking more money into the existing, failed program is a lousy impetus for trying something new.
retiredds
July 12th, 2012
9:23 am
leave this stuff up to the states, like GA, and the people lose every time.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 12th, 2012
9:23 am
For all you posters invoking Christianity and Jesus in a comical attempt to make the case for government mandated health care, I would remind you that this nation is not, nor can it ever be, a theocracy.
If you wish to invoke what YOU would do on your own in a religious context, feel free.
But leave religion out of the realm of government, if you would please. The irony of having to read that from people who would usually wish for all religious references to be removed from every facet of government life in any other instance is just too rich.
DannyX
July 12th, 2012
9:24 am
“That cunard is getting a bit stale”
Yes because Jesus was all about sticking up for the rich. Jesus would love American values, spend almost a trillion dollars a year on our war machine while ignoring the health of the working poor.
Shock and awe Jesus is awesome.
curious
July 12th, 2012
9:26 am
If we’re lucky, we can aspire to a Healthcare system like in Haiti.
The wealthy can afford good Healthcare. The others- tough luck.
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
9:26 am
swga @ 7:41: Medicaid already covers 1 in 6 people in Georgia. The expansion would increase it to 1 in 4 — while, as I wrote in the OP, very likely making the program even worse for the existing enrollees. How many is enough?
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 12th, 2012
9:27 am
JF McNamara, is it never “the free market” when government mandates it.
And I gotta love your sudden affection for the free market, anyway. I didn’t hear you calling for passage of the GOP plan which expands the free markets regarding health care coverage, did I?
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
9:28 am
Some people @ 7:53: There’s a world of difference between losing money on every patient and reducing (what amounts to) the profit margin on each one.
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
9:29 am
carlosgvv @ 7:59: In Georgia, at least, the legal services were provided pro bono by private attorneys.
I know, I know, you don’t believe anything you read.
@@
July 12th, 2012
9:31 am
The irony of having to read that from people who would usually wish for all religious references to be removed from every facet of government life in any other instance is just too rich.
Their attempts to judge who fails the test is even richer.
DannyX
July 12th, 2012
9:31 am
Medicaid already covers people in this state who work very little or not at all.
Do the people who work low wage jobs that have no employer insurance benefits just not deserve healthcare? How are they supposed to pay the premiums Kyle?
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
9:31 am
Atlanta Mom @ 8:08: That’s two in a row where what’s “clear” to you is not what I wrote.
The point I made in that T-SPLOST column was that one can hardly argue it’s a good plan unless a majority of people think it makes things better for them. After all, improving things for the most people possible is, well, the entire point of the exercise.
Providing health care for the poor is an entirely different undertaking. My argument today is that Medicaid has proven to be a mediocre way of doing so, and expanding it — rather than trying something else — is a bad deal both for those in need of health care and taxpayers.
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
9:36 am
@@ @ 8:21: Or, more likely, they simply choose not to participate in the program. The larger that program gets, the bigger a problem non-participation by doctors poses. Seems to me we should try something else.
Btw, what this problem really speaks to is the emergence of a two-tier health system, where those with the means to escape the program — which is approaching a minority of the population — do so, and those without the means are stuck in it receiving substandard care.
td
July 12th, 2012
9:36 am
Why should anyone receive FREE insurance? Here is my idea:
The state should set up a pool where anyone can come in and purchase the same plan that state employees have. The person will have to pay the same premium cost and have the same deductibles and co-pays. We should re write the medical liability laws in the state to make Dr’s that treat these patients the same immunities as EMT’s, Police and Firefighters receive because then their liability insurance cost would come down dramatically.
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
9:36 am
JDW: First, we are talking about Medicaid, not Medicare.
Second, you don’t do hyperbole well.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 12th, 2012
9:39 am
“you know the one BY THE PEOPLE AND FOR THE PEOPLE.”
Got an official document that proclaims that, JDW?
Didn’t think so. Kyle’s right about the hyperbole thing.
Heartless
July 12th, 2012
9:41 am
Next time a conservative goes into a restaurant and the low wage server waits on your table, or perhaps a lawn care service mows your lawn, or a clerk helps you at a store or the carpenter finishes building your house, tell them thanks and you better stay healthy. We all like the fact that many of these services are extremely cheap in this country, in part because we provide them just enough to live, but rarely the healthcare to sustain it long term. Should people that provide these basic services not be entitled to health insurance? We know that conservatives are vehemently against minimum wage increases and constraints on the free market requiring employers to provide such benefits so what is the alternative?
Kyle, I find your position to be shameful.
@@
July 12th, 2012
9:41 am
Kyle:
Or, more likely, they simply choose not to participate in the program.
True! I stand to lose two of my doctors as a result. I hate shopping for new doctors…especially gynecologists.
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
9:42 am
SBinF @ 8:49: No one’s made that argument, unless you count the liberals caricaturing what I’ve said, but don’t let that stop you.
Daniel
July 12th, 2012
9:47 am
The only profession as greedy and non-Christian as bankers are doctors.
Even small town doctors are all millionaires now.
They should all be forced to sign up like attorneys and take turns seeing the Medicare and Medicaid patients.
Georgia being 49th in the nation for medical care has some of the worst in every way.
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
9:47 am
JF @ 9:21: No, government (or anyone else, for that matter) inflexibly dictating what it will pay and then trying to create a cartel of buyers, or a monopsony, is the opposite of a free market.
td
July 12th, 2012
9:48 am
DannyX
July 12th, 2012
9:31 am
Medicaid already covers people in this state who work very little or not at all.
Do the people who work low wage jobs that have no employer insurance benefits just not deserve healthcare? How are they supposed to pay the premiums Kyle?
1: If those people are not the young working to get job experience then what choices have they made in life to have them stuck in such low wage jobs?
2: How many of them already pay more the $100 per month for cable TV, pay more then $100 per month for unlimited texting and internet on their smart phones or go out to eat out several times per month or go out drinking? Yes life has choices.
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
9:48 am
curious @ 9:26: Actually, nothing could put us on a faster track to such a status than an expansion of the substandard Medicaid program.
JF McNamara
July 12th, 2012
9:49 am
@Tiberius,
I’ve been consistent since the whole thing started that I wanted the sides to work together instead of the outright refusal of Republicans to pass anything. I thought wider access was an idea along with many others that the Republicans could have proposed that could have been worked into the plan. They completely failed America by not doing their job of negotiating governance and became the party of death panels and “job killing…” on the topic.
In addition, I’ve always been a proponent of free markets where they make sense. We need regulations to keep the game fair and there are things that are natural monopolies, but overall the free market produces the best result. As an American investor and an MBA, I know that to be true.
If you haven’t gotten that from my posts, you haven’t read many of them. I believe in a lot of Republican principles, but the current bunch isn’t really interested in doing anything other than being spiteful and obstructionist. I’m about solving problems not being petty.
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
July 12th, 2012
9:50 am
Kyle – Just curious, how many of these new bleeding hearts here this morning have the same IP address? It sounds like they all flew out of the same MSNBC fever swamp.
td
July 12th, 2012
9:51 am
Daniel
July 12th, 2012
9:47 am
The only profession as greedy and non-Christian as bankers are doctors.
Why should someone that has spent more then 22 years in school and have a skill set that 99.9% of the population does not have not be paid for the skill set. You too could and should become wealthy if you had the ability to get the same skill set.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 12th, 2012
9:53 am
“Should people that provide these basic services not be entitled to health insurance?”
They are entitled to health insurance. In fact, NO ONE is denying them access to health insurance. Like everything in life, they simply must prioritize what they wish to pay for. Heck, I’ll bet if these low-income people would give up their pack a day smoking habits, they’d not only live longer and healthier, but they could take that money saved and actually BUY health care with it! Let’s see . . $5 a day would be $1800 per year, which would make a pretty good-sized dent in a catastrophic insurance plan.
“We know that conservatives are vehemently against minimum wage increases and constraints on the free market requiring employers to provide such benefits so what is the alternative?”
It’s been proven that minimum wage laws ARE a constraint on the free market.
The alternative IS the free market.
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
9:53 am
DannyX @ 9:31: Well, for starters, if the state had more flexibility in how it administered Medicaid (e.g., through block-granting, a la welfare reform), it could decide to subsidize some people’s insurance completely and other people’s only partially, according to need. It could offer less-comprehensive coverage, such as catastrophic-only, for those younger, healthier people who tend to make up a large chunk of the uninsured population. It could change the law so that employers could offer some kind of health benefit that could be combined with Medicaid funds.
There are any number of possibilities, but they are not possible as long as Washington sets the rules for everyone — and is lobbied to required the maximum “minimum” coverage possible.
DannyX
July 12th, 2012
9:54 am
“1: If those people are not the young working to get job experience then what choices have they made in life to have them stuck in such low wage jobs?”
So are you saying that low wage earners don’t deserve health care?
The people that made the bad choices are already getting Medicaid, I don’t understand your disdain for the working poor. Some people are doing the best they can.
JF McNamara
July 12th, 2012
9:56 am
@Kyle,
No, The free market is not having the entire price dictated to the them. Only those on medicaid, so you have the option, like today, of not serving them. It’s no different that giving people food stamps. They have an allotment that they can buy groceries with, but that isn’t the dictator of market prices.
If anything, the government is helping the free market by creating a larger pool of clients. If there are people with a certain amount of money to spend, people will find a way to take that money and make a profit.
The government isn’t fixing prices. Its providing allotments for some market participants. That’s a lot different.
ByteMe
July 12th, 2012
9:57 am
before the court’s ruling for Alpharetta-based Jackson Healthcare, one in four doctors said they won’t see Medicaid patients, and one in three said they won’t accept new Medicaid patients. In Georgia, 42 percent said they refuse new Medicaid patients.
Let’s turn that around:
75% of doctors WILL see Medicaid patients.
66% of doctors WILL see new Medicaid patients.
But what wasn’t asked… or maybe it was and you failed to report: what percent won’t see Medicare patients? I’m guessing it’s the same number… for the same reason.
And yet seniors are generally happy with Medicare, because they get that there’s NO ALTERNATIVE in the private market once they start to get sick.
For poor people… what’s the alternative to Medicaid? Dying?
Heartless
July 12th, 2012
9:58 am
TD – 9:51 AM
I don’t believe doctors should take a vow of poverty, but let be honest, healthcare is not a free market where wages find their efficient spot on the supply – demand curve. I have spent many hours engaged in pricing analysis to determine the profit maximizing price of a service and most times that price if far down the curve from where it maximizes demand. So are you saying that people would decide to hold off on that heart bypass surgery if they felt the price too high? This is a market where consumers are price takers and in such a market we have to consider the appropriate compensation for its providers.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 12th, 2012
9:59 am
“I thought wider access was an idea along with many others that the Republicans could have proposed that could have been worked into the plan.”
JF, why do you continue to IGNORE the seven distinct proposals that Republicans submitted at the committee level during the health care debate, only to be shut down by the Pelosi-run House and committee leadership?
All of which would have provided wider access and increased the free market availability of health care?
It’s pretty tiring to keep hearing Republicans didn’t have a plan and that they refused to participate over and over, when the facts are that the Democrat-controlled House wouldn’t even let their ideas get a hearing at the committee level. It is an ignorance of reality that I find unconscionable.
@@
July 12th, 2012
10:01 am
Kyle @ 9:53 using those oft admired critical thinking skills.
Just because the democratic party has declared healthcare at critical mass, doesn’t mean their hastily put together plan is the only way out. As is often the case, they took the lazy approach.
fair and balanced
July 12th, 2012
10:03 am
Okay so are the feds going to get reimbursed for the 8.5 billion dollars that Romneycare has gone over the state’s allotment with waivers obtained by Romney and Kennedy??. You and I are paying for it Kyle. Isn’t that the “free stuff Romney said last night the other guy wants to keep funding???
Heartless
July 12th, 2012
10:05 am
Tiberius, which of those 7 GOP proposals did you most agree with and how did it expand coverage to a wider base at a competitive cost?
td
July 12th, 2012
10:06 am
DannyX
July 12th, 2012
9:54 am
Again you either take my statements out of context or your comprehension skills need some work. If you have read everything I have said on the subject then you would know that I believe we should give access to everyone but we should not subsidize anyone.
“I don’t understand your disdain for the working poor”
How is it disdain when all I am saying is people should be allowed to make choices in life and then take responsibility for those choices and reap the consequences for such choices? This is freedom not disdain.
JDW
July 12th, 2012
10:07 am
Kyle…”Medicaid already covers 1 in 6 people in Georgia. The expansion would increase it to 1 in 4″
Isn’t that the real problem you should be writing about. Think about it 1 in 6 people in Georgia are living the American Dream to the tune of 42% of the poverty level…that’s $9700 annually for a family of four. Instead of begrudging them health care maybe we should spend some effort figuring out what can be done to solve that problem.
JDW
July 12th, 2012
10:10 am
@Kyle…”There are any number of possibilities, but they are not possible as long as Washington sets the rules for everyone ”
And if Washington didn’t “set the rules” our valiant elected officials here in Georgia would have kept on doing exactly what they have been doing for the last 10 years…NOTHING.
ByteMe
July 12th, 2012
10:13 am
Isn’t that the real problem you should be writing about. Think about it 1 in 6 people in Georgia are living the American Dream to the tune of 42% of the poverty level…that’s $9700 annually for a family of four. Instead of begrudging them health care maybe we should spend some effort figuring out what can be done to solve that problem.
That’s what tax cuts are for, right? So these people can keep more of their money.
@@
July 12th, 2012
10:13 am
Off-topic!
Obama’s campaign countered that Romney’s policies would hurt working families in the black community, an argument Biden was expected to make before the NAACP delegates. Democrats said Romney had opposed the rescue of the U.S. auto industry, the health care law and the economic stimulus, which they said helped black voters.
Certainly hasn’t helped ‘em in the area of employment.
14.4% unemployment is helpful!!??!!
td
July 12th, 2012
10:14 am
Heartless
July 12th, 2012
9:58 am
Since you have spent hours on “pricing analysis” then can you tell us the % of the price of heart bypass surgery goes to liability insurance for the Dr and to the hospital? Also, how much of the cost goes to lawyers retainers fees?
Don't Tread
July 12th, 2012
10:15 am
Coercion seems to be the modus operandi of the Federal government these days. No wonder people don’t trust it.
If I were a doctor, I wouldn’t be accepting any patients whose bills were paid for by the Federal government either. There’s too many strings attached.
JF McNamara
July 12th, 2012
10:15 am
@Tiberius,
The reason you keep hearing that about the debate is because the Republicans were responsible for the mean spirited tone and those proposals were not within the context of the negotiations. They were simply used to try to stop the process.
The Republicans don’t have a detailed and implementable plan TODAY. If they had one two years ago, repeal and replace would have a lot more traction because they would actually have a replacement option. I personally want to see one because I think it would have good ideas, but all we keep getting is non-specific bullet point propaganda.
There is no concrete plan and there never has been.
JDW
July 12th, 2012
10:16 am
@Kyle…”First, we are talking about Medicaid, not Medicare.”
Yep..spell check got me…as for hyperbole…I thought it was quite illustrative and borne of the frustration of the continued desire of those in this state to fall behind the rest of the country in most everything from transportation to health care.
JDW
July 12th, 2012
10:17 am
@Tiberius…”NO ONE is denying them access to health insurance”
Just like NO ONE is denying you your very own 747
Heartless
July 12th, 2012
10:21 am
TD, professional pricing and the science of determining optimal pricing has nothing to do with your strawman diversion of analyzing individual cost components of a product or service.
To answer your questions though, studies have shown malpractice insurance costs average between 0.5% and 2% of healthcare costs so nice try.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 12th, 2012
10:22 am
“which of those 7 GOP proposals did you most agree with and how did it expand coverage to a wider base at a competitive cost?”
First and foremost, tort reform. Doctors in a nationwide survey (I believe the same Jackson Health the Kyle cites) said they run excessive and unnecessary tests to the tune of an extra 30% of total health care costs, just to AVOID potential litigation. How many more people could afford health care if the cost was reduced by 30% of today’s rates? A lot more.
Second, expanding group insurance pools. Why can’t all real estate agents or restaurant owners be allowed to become a group across the country? Group rates lower costs.
Third, offering the same insurance policies across state lines, and removing state mandates for certain coverages. Allowing a one-type basic policy, with additional riders for specific coverages if needed across state lines, would lower the cost to consumers. For instance, why should my basic policy mandate coverage for pregnancy and child birth if I have already had a vasectomy? Of if I’m 60? Mental health coverage if I have no family history of same and have no desire for it? Offer a BASIC needs policy to everyone across state lines, and allow specific options for those who might still be in the market for services that others no longer need.
Dirty Dawg
July 12th, 2012
10:24 am
Kyle, it’s estimated that some 40,000 people die annually because they don’t have access to adequate, and somewhat affordable, healthcare. Don’t know how many in Georgia, but a lot. So you and the rest of those you speak for say, ‘Well I guess they’ll just have to die cause its a ‘bad deal’ economically speaking’. Tell me, what happens when we allow this kind of thinking – if you can’t make money on it you just don’t do it – to go unchecked? What’s the ‘ultimate’ outcome? Or as your old friends in Germany once asked, ‘Whats our ‘final solution’ going to be?’
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 12th, 2012
10:24 am
“Just like NO ONE is denying you your very own 747″
And if I want my very own 747, JDW, I’ll just have to make the right choices in life and work harder for it, not wait for it to be handed to me.
Just like with health care.
They BOTH suck
July 12th, 2012
10:26 am
Please provide link to that tort reform survey that indicates doctors nation wide claim 30%. Would hope it would not be some advocacy group but some org that we can somewhat agree on.
Is that what they are seeing in TX, 30%? If not 30% then what are the numbers to date?
Don Abernethy
July 12th, 2012
10:26 am
The more the governments get involved with medical care the more screwed up it becomes. Government needs to butt out of our medical care in the U.S. IRS agents involved with our medical care?? Who in the world would think of that crazy idea? It is our wonderful lying elected officials who never read a bill they vote on because they are too busy spending the money they get from lobbyist.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 12th, 2012
10:27 am
“The reason you keep hearing that about the debate is because the Republicans were responsible for the mean spirited tone and those proposals were not within the context of the negotiations. They were simply used to try to stop the process. ”
Shorter, JF McNamara. “I don’t agree with them so they didn’t need to be heard.” would have gotten your point across much more efficiently.
Some people are stupid
July 12th, 2012
10:27 am
Kyle-
There’s a world of difference between losing money on every patient and reducing (what amounts to) the profit margin on each one.
Huh?
I report said losing money on every patient but seeing more of them would allow to break even suggesting that it wouldn’t work.
I said the same argument about taxing less from everyone but taxing more people would yield the same effect then. Is that not the same argument.
And on a sidenote, if I am reducing the profit margin, I still “make” a profit.
Not really sure what that had do to with either statement.
Southrrn white boy
July 12th, 2012
10:29 am
Medicaid is not a flawed or bad program. The people covered by mediciad are the sickest and most disabled in society, and the program covers them at a fraction of the cost of private commercial health insurance. Its admin costs are about 3-4 percent, again a fraction of commercial insurance. Bringing $34 billion in fed funds to the state would generate thousands of jobs and pump a great deal of money into slow economies across the state, particularly in rural areas. And of course it would give folks without insurance access to preventive and basic health care for the first time. This is not a bad deal for Gerogia, it is the smart thing to do.
Finally, the state’s $4.5 billion cost figure over ten years is wildly inflated. But the bigger laugh in you column was suggesting that if the General Assembly didnt spend the money for Medicaid match that it would take those monies, or some portion of them, and use them to buy catastrophic insurance coverage for the same polulation. Not going to happen.
They BOTH suck
July 12th, 2012
10:31 am
Let me guess, the blogger provides a survey from some off the wall org about doctors in TN. I read where he made the same general statement about doctors then provide some bs about a TN survey a few months back.
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
10:31 am
JF @ 9:56: “The government isn’t fixing prices. Its providing allotments for some market participants.”
I disagree completely. “Providing allotments” would mean something along the lines of vouchers or premium supports, a la the Paul Ryan plan for reforming Medicare. Food stamps is indeed an example of that. (On a related note, people need both food and health care, but food prices haven’t sky-rocketed the way health-care prices have.)
But in both Medicaid and Medicare, the government tells providers what it will pay for certain procedures. That’s not “price-fixing” in the sense that providers are free to charge differently for patients not on one of those programs (leading directly to the higher prices we all lament, btw) but because 17% of Georgians are on Medicaid, 12% are on Medicare, and a significant number of others are in other government-funded programs, whether the VA or government-worker plans, the government is dictating a whole lot of the prices in this “market.”
All of this goes a long way toward explaining why the “larger pool of clients” isn’t bringing about the lower prices it ought to.
GT
July 12th, 2012
10:32 am
Obstructionist, like gorilla fighters of a lost cause and era. It is a little too obvious pointing out “if” the feds keep their word, as if they are subject to the same weak character that drowns this state. I think of Hope Scholarships and reneging and someone tell me what happens to that dollar I give the store for getting rid of my used tires. You sell it as one purpose and then spend it as if your planned was to lie to us the whole time,then accuse the universe of these tricks in a clever misdirection play. I love when you call these state legislators good people, and endorse them, it put you in the same pot they are in and no longer a objective journalist but a mouth piece for this class of trolls.
md
July 12th, 2012
10:32 am
“Yes because Jesus was all about sticking up for the rich.”
The guy I grew up with was more about doing what was right……and that doesn’t include enabling, because enabling leads to an even bigger problem…..dependence.
If we as a society provide an assistance program and people are choosing not to participate in said assistance program putting themselves on the harder road of life, why is it others that need to get them back on the easier road in life??
True help (not enabling) requires that the individual choose to participate, or one is just throwing away money that could be used to help those that truly want to help themselves………..
An alcoholic will remain an alcoholic until s/he decides to acknowledge that the problem even exists……then that individual is the only one that can change the behavior. One does not give alcohol to an alcoholic and expect them to change………
1961_Xer
July 12th, 2012
10:33 am
I think that on the obvious things to say, and what Obamacare advocates (in general) won’t say is that obtaining health insurance is not the same as access to healthcare or access to healthcare providers.
A person in Atlanta will not have the same access to healthcare or providers as does a person in Boston. A person in, say, Wadley, GA will not have the same access to healthcare or providers as does a person in Atlanta.
There are, in fact, hundreds of counties throughout the country where there are no doctors AT ALL.
Yet, everyone will have to purchase health insurance even if they have no means to use it. And where there are means to use it, those who actually pay for there health insurance will have to stand in longer and longer lines behind the subsidized …. the people to whom their wealth was transferred. It is like standing in line behind a food stamp recipient, watching them pay for steak with their ebt card while you pay for hot dogs.
Our welfare state is out of control.
They BOTH suck
July 12th, 2012
10:34 am
Kyle
Have doctors flooded into TX because of their tort reform laws?
How about doctors leaving Mass because of Romneycare? Last I checked, it could have changed, they had and still have the best doctor / patient ratio in the US.
Like everything else, time will be the tale of the tape
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 12th, 2012
10:34 am
What’s the matter, They BOTH suck? Too lazy to type “Jackson healthcare survey tort reform” into your Google browser?
That’s OK, I’ve done your work for you anyway.
I suggest you focus on page 4, the first bullet point (see, I’ve done your work for you again! – you sure you aren’t a liberal?) and read pages 7 and 8.
http://www.jacksonhealthcare.com/media/8968/defensivemedicine_ebook_final.pdf
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
10:36 am
ByteMe @ 9:57: Actually, Medicare tends to fare better in most states. In Florida, for example — which is a pretty important example when it comes to Medicare — 77% of doctors accept new Medicare patients, but only 53% accept new Medicaid patients. In Georgia, Medicare acceptance is 11 points higher.
Thomas Heyward Jr.
July 12th, 2012
10:37 am
I am an imperfect messenger, but the message is perfect……………………………………………………allow young workers to opt out. Block grants Medicaid and other welfare programs to allow States the flexibility and ingenuity they need to solve their own unique problems without harming those currently relying on the programs.”
Ron Paul
.
But then again………….Kyle supports a man who has no problem with sticking a state-sponsored gun to the head of a citizen and FORCING compliance.
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
10:38 am
fair and balanced @ 10:03: That’s a fair point. One of the reasons Romneycare can be described to some degree as a “success” is that the feds are picking up a big chunk of the tab. Under Obamacare, that spending is extended nationwide, which is why it’s such a hugely costly undertaking.
Some people are stupid
July 12th, 2012
10:38 am
Kyle-
Well, for starters, if the state had more flexibility in how it administered Medicaid (e.g., through block-granting, a la welfare reform), it could decide to subsidize some people’s insurance completely and other people’s only partially, according to need. It could offer less-comprehensive coverage, such as catastrophic-only, for those younger, healthier people who tend to make up a large chunk of the uninsured population. It could change the law so that employers could offer some kind of health benefit that could be combined with Medicaid funds.
That’s a good idea. Georgia should do something like that in their healthcare exchange!!!
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 12th, 2012
10:42 am
Two points, They BOTH suck.
One, tort reform cannot be accomplished on a state-by-state basis. It is one of the few things I believe needs to occur at the Federal level.
Two, doctors in Mass. are no different than across the country. They are also not accepting new patients, and there are less of them in Mass. since the passage of Romneycare. Could be costs (much higher there), could be weather, could be rules and regulations, but they are leaving. Whether they still have the highest doctor / patient coverage is moot if the numbers are lowering and the coverage isn’t being expanded.
md
July 12th, 2012
10:44 am
“The reason you keep hearing that about the debate is because the Republicans were responsible for the mean spirited tone and those proposals were not within the context of the negotiations. They were simply used to try to stop the process. ”
I have to throw the bs card on that one…..Senator Snowe was the only reason the bill even got out of committee as she was trying extremely hard to work out a compromise……..
Go read up on why she had to vote no on the bill and why she now regrets ever letting it out of committee……….Brutus is a hint.
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
10:44 am
JDW @ 10:07: No, 1 in 6 are not living at 42% of the federal poverty level (FPL). As I wrote, that’s for most adults. All children under 18 (and former foster children until they’re 21), pregnant women, people with certain types of cancer, and the elderly, blind and disabled are all covered at higher percentages of the FPL, as high as 200%.
The real problem is that health care costs are too high, and neither this nor the other parts of Obamacare really get at that from the supply side, which is where much of the problem lies. And it doesn’t address the real problem on the demand side, which is that third-party payer has insulated so many people from the costs of their health care that prices have become immaterial. No market works without the price signal.
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
10:45 am
JDW @ 10:10, proving once again to be the king of counterfactuals.
Southrrn white boy
July 12th, 2012
10:45 am
There is no commercial health insurance policy anywhere in America that could be purchased with a voucher that would come close to providing the health coverage that Medicaid does for anywhere near the per person cost of the Medicaid program. As to block grants, check out their history. The funding is cut year after year and the states that suffer the most are fast growing states like GA. They are not an answer. They will lead to more uninsurance and more cost shifting to those of us in employer sponsored plans.
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
10:47 am
Dirty Dawg @ 10:24: I spent the first part of the column explaining the non-economic reasons it’s a bad deal, for the people who are or would be enrolled in the program.
More and more, we are telling these people, “Here’s some health insurance! Now good luck finding a doctor who will accept it.”
td
July 12th, 2012
10:48 am
Dirty Dawg
July 12th, 2012
10:24 am
” it’s estimated that some 40,000 people die annually because they don’t have access to adequate, and somewhat affordable, healthcare.”
Where is these stats coming from?
Don't Tread
July 12th, 2012
10:48 am
“Medicaid is not a flawed or bad program.”
…Seriously? I suppose you’ve not seen the news stories of people being prosecuted for Medicaid fraud after bilking the system for thousands (tens, hundreds of thousands) of dollars?
There’s plenty of fraud and abuse of Medicaid, which constitutes “flaws” in my book.
iggy
July 12th, 2012
10:48 am
Providing “free or basic” healthcare via the expense of the economy and well being of individuals who contribute something to society, is the absolute wrong thing to do.
Too many scofflaws, bums, excuse makers out there. Let them eat cake.
They BOT suck
July 12th, 2012
10:49 am
Hahahha
All that bloviating for nothing.
Jackson Healthcare can not be considered anything less than a biased source and advocate in every sense of the word.
Next you will be telling me that Maddow and Hannity provide unbiased information.
Keep trying. Information from an org not considered and advocacy group on either side.
Take care
Auntie Christ
July 12th, 2012
10:49 am
In 2011, 20 percent of the budget, or $718 billion, paid for defense and security-related international activities. Adding in NASA, FBI/Homeland Security Anti-Terrorism Programs, Covert Ops, et al raises this to over a trillion $ annually.
For 2011, three health insurance programs – Medicare, Medicaid, and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) – together accounted for 21 percent of the budget in 2011, or $769 billion. Nearly two-thirds of this amount, or $486 billion, went to Medicare,
The law of the land states that two of the primary objectives of our government are to “provide for the common defense,” and to “promote the general welfare.” It does not prioritize one over the other,but I cannot believe that the signers of that document would approve of a massive US military presence in Europe, Asia, and of all places Guantanimo Bay Cuba, but denies basic “general welfare” to the citizenry in the form of healing when that citizen is ill.
There is something wrong with a country and citizenry that will spend Billions on weapons and a military presence 1000’s of miles from it’s shores, yet decries a single $ being spent on an indigent who can’t pay for or it or can’t obtain health care because of congenital conditions.
I am a veteran and I understand the need for a standing army, however I will look sceptically at anyone who tells me that bearing the cost of personnel, housing, and other support for a huge army in Europe or Asia is vital to my well being. Not in this age of rapid deployment. If the Germans or Japanese feel thay need protection, let them bear the cost, while we use the money to save lives at home.
md
July 12th, 2012
10:50 am
“Kyle supports a man who has no problem with sticking a state-sponsored gun to the head of a citizen and FORCING compliance.”
Actually, the good folks of MA wanted that system and voted accordingly………which is how it should be….State by State. that way, the option to move if one is extremely dissatisfied still exists……
Instead, we are currently stuck with one parties vision of hc utopia………..
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
10:50 am
Southern white boy @ 10:29: I didn’t say they would do that. I wrote, “Even if state lawmakers were inclined to spend an extra billion or two on health care” they would be wiser to spend it that way.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 12th, 2012
10:52 am
“” it’s estimated that some 40,000 people die annually because they don’t have access to adequate, and somewhat affordable, healthcare.”
Where is these stats coming from?”
From that nut-job and former Congressman, Alan Grayson of Florida. Took an old Harvard study (I believe) and inflated the numbers already artificially inflated due to flawed analysis.
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
10:53 am
Thomas @ 10:37: Actually, what I support on this issue is the exact proposal you mentioned.
iggy
July 12th, 2012
10:53 am
Seems many would rather pay for the latest cell phone gadget, cable television, flat screen tv, HDTV, lease autos they cant afford, go on cruises than pay for their childrens healthcare.
If the State is responsible for feeding, clothing, etc, these kids then these same kids should be made wards of the State and the parents sent to prison for negligence.
md
July 12th, 2012
10:54 am
“There is no commercial health insurance policy anywhere in America that could be purchased with a voucher that would come close to providing the health coverage that Medicaid does for anywhere near the per person cost of the Medicaid program.”
And neither can medicaid…….it’s artificial costs are merely transferred to everybody else through higher doctor/medical fees………..
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
10:54 am
Some people @ 10:38: And I wrote as much last year.
Some people are stupid
July 12th, 2012
10:54 am
The real problem is that health care costs are too high, and neither this nor the other parts of Obamacare really get at that from the supply side, which is where much of the problem lies. And it doesn’t address the real problem on the demand side, which is that third-party payer has insulated so many people from the costs of their health care that prices have become immaterial. No market works without the price signal.
You tend to not understand that healthcare is a unique market though. Preventive care is the cheapest but if you don’t have insurance, it’s hard to access would you agree.
As far as the cost of actual healthcare, the macro laws of supply and demand don’t really work. If your daughter had a life threatening disease, and Doctor A, could treat it for 10000 and she has a 50 % chance to live and Doctor B can treat it at 100k, but she has a 99.9% chance to live, most people would find some way to do Doctor B. Each “cost” in healthcare is completely independent of supply. There are 20,000 Cat scan machines in Atlanta, but each one charges a different price based off the skills and talents and the prospective dagnosis and treatment of the physician, not by competition.
Southrrn white boy
July 12th, 2012
10:55 am
Dont tread: yes, seen the reports and read the studies that say that the fraud and abuse in Medicaid is a very small percent of total expenditures. And medicaid spends millions preventing and rooting out fraud.
Do you think the private health insurance world is fraud and abuse free? If so, i have some land to sell you.
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
10:55 am
Tiberius @ 10:42: I disagree. Torts are a state matter, and there’s no reason states can’t handle this issue on their own.
ElephantWhip
July 12th, 2012
10:56 am
Just a thought:
This might become moot as soon as the law takes effect. Someone will find the plaintiff that has moved from one state where s/he was covered by the medicare to a state that does not cover her/him. S/he will then file a lawsuit demanding the same coverage s/he was receiving in the prior state under the “Privileges and Immunities” clause of the US constitution (federal law requires that they be insured; they were insured in the previous state; they must be able to receive this privilege in the new state). Then a class will develop. When the class wins, the new state will be required to fund insurance for anyone in this class of people.
Or they could go ahead and take federal funds now under Medicare expansion to help them cover these people.
md
July 12th, 2012
10:56 am
“The law of the land states that two of the primary objectives of our government are to “provide for the common defense,” and to “promote the general welfare.””
Considering the fact that words actually do have meaning, one should notice the the first objective clearly states to “provide”, while the second objective clearly states to “promote”…..there is a difference and it was put there for a reason………..
iggy
July 12th, 2012
10:56 am
Perhaps with the onslaught of Global Warming the populace will be culled via natural selection.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 12th, 2012
10:57 am
“All that bloviating for nothing.
Jackson Healthcare can not be considered anything less than a biased source and advocate in every sense of the word.”
I will remind you to look at Page 4 again, They BOTH suck, which references GALLUP polling as well. Admittedly, not to the same numbers (over 70% to Jackson’s 90+% but still significant) but are you now dissing Gallup as well?
Or is it just that you’ve been caught not knowing what the heck you’re talking about – again – and simply need the “biased source” argument to fall back on?
They BOTH suck
July 12th, 2012
10:57 am
We know the numbers are not coming from Jackson Healthcare
Hahahahaha
Thomas Heyward Jr.
July 12th, 2012
10:58 am
md
July 12th, 2012
10:50 am
“Kyle supports a man who has no problem with sticking a state-sponsored gun to the head of a citizen and FORCING compliance.”
Actually, the good folks of MA wanted that system and voted accordingly………which is how it should be….State by State. that way, the option to move if one is extremely dissatisfied still exists……
——————————————————————————————–
.
You couldn’t be more wrong MD.
.
Something about the tyranny of the majority versus natural law.
td
July 12th, 2012
10:59 am
Southrrn white boy
July 12th, 2012
10:45 am
I was in my Dr’s office on Tuesday and we got into a discussion about Obamacare. He told me he has cash patients and charges them $70 per visit for wellness checks and then he can get them a discount for lab work if they want to pay cash.
SBinF
July 12th, 2012
11:03 am
“No one’s made that argument, unless you count the liberals caricaturing what I’ve said, but don’t let that stop you.”
Right. You say don’t allow the Medicaid expansion, yet provide no insight as to how the uninsured folks should access medical care. I think my original post sums it up rather well.
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
11:03 am
Some people @ 10:54: You write about these dire circumstances as if they happen to most people on a regular basis. Should we expect people to compare prices on surgeons when they’ve just been in a car wreck? Of course not! That’s what insurance is for. But checkups, immunizations, screenings, and the routine stuff that represents the majority of health care for the majority of people can easily be shopped around (if prices are more transparent, which is a real problem) and are not the kind of thing that insurance is well-suited to cover anyway.
Btw, on your point about CAT scan machines: Read this column, especially the 14th paragraph. Which reminds me, I’ve been meaning to follow up on GHLC…
md
July 12th, 2012
11:04 am
“Or they could go ahead and take federal funds now under Medicare expansion to help them cover these people.”
And cut what??
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 12th, 2012
11:04 am
“We know the numbers are not coming from Jackson Healthcare”
Oh, you “know”, They BOTH suck?
Please provide your proof that their survey is flawed.
I won’t hold my breath waiting.
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
11:04 am
ElephantWhip @ 10:56: I highly doubt SCOTUS would overrule itself on this issue.
@@
July 12th, 2012
11:06 am
I’m always amused by the refusal to acknowledge the benefits of tort reform. HECK! No sooner does the FDA approve a drug are the lawyers all over it. “If you or one of your loved ones has suffered injury or loss of life due to (insert drug/device here)…you may be entitled…blah blah blah”.
md
July 12th, 2012
11:06 am
“You couldn’t be more wrong MD.”
Ok, lets assume I’m wrong…..now explain why……….
Some people are stupid
July 12th, 2012
11:09 am
Kyle-
I can agree with you to some degree on routine processes being shopped around. My only caveat is once again, you get what you pay for. When I get a checkup, I’m paying for the doctor’s experience, I have a lot of friends who are doctors who in your scenario may be cheaped, but could miss signs of things that may effect me long term due to lack of experience. Immunizations and such though, I am in complete agreement.
jose
July 12th, 2012
11:11 am
One of the biggest but untalked about issues in Georgia’s Medicaid program, current or expanded, is the cost to Georgia taxpayers of treating smoking related lllness. Several years ago it was projected that smoking cost to GA Medicaid upwards of more than $100 million. That has no doubt grown and would get exponentially bigger if the state/feds expand Medicaid.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 12th, 2012
11:13 am
md, I’ve been trying to get your 10:56 point about “provide and promote” across to these people for years.
But they
just
don’t
get
it.
ElephantWhip
July 12th, 2012
11:13 am
Kyle:
It would not be overruling itself concerning whether the feds can withhold funding which states previously received. It told the feds that they can only withhold funds that would be used to expand Medicare if the states did not expand it, not funds the states already received.
No one raised the issue concerning what a citizen could do in light of this ruling concerning his now-constitutional right to healthcare coverage and a state’s refusal to pay for it even though he had recieved it as a privilege to living in a prior state. (That would have been impossible to raise because no one could forsee which way the court would rule on the Medicaid issue). A plaintiff could not exist to raise the complaint until the plaintiff receives the benefit in one state and is denied the same benefit in another.
I bet the states refusing to get the new Medicaid will be required to pay for coverage of those people out of their own pockets.
Some people are stupid
July 12th, 2012
11:14 am
Here is my issue with those who champion tort reform as some magic bulltet. It someone has suffered some harm due to negligence, how can you put a limit on how much they should get. You can’t predict the future and what this person would have done if said event had not happened. I’m sure if somethign happened to you or your love ones that was a result of malpractice or negligence, you wouldn’t be sitting there saying, just give me up to 100k and thats all.
md
July 12th, 2012
11:15 am
“Several years ago it was projected that smoking cost to GA Medicaid upwards of more than $100 million.”
Don’t worry…..now that the feds have appointed themselves the keeper of all thinks medical, one can count on all the bad things we do getting taxed to the max…….
Cigarettes and tanning beds are just the opening salvo, as they are arbitrary bad choices…..2 out of many, many, many………one is fooling themselves if one believes the feds will stop at 2…….
iggy
July 12th, 2012
11:16 am
“Georgia taxpayers of treating smoking related lllness.”
I wonder what the cost is of treating obesity related illness?
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
11:16 am
Some people: Click the link on my 11:03.
jose
July 12th, 2012
11:17 am
One thing that AMAZES me about this whole Obamacare thing….there is no way it can work. Even if it somehow provides insurance for 30 million people llke Obama and Pelosi say it will, mere coverage does not mean access to health care. Georgia, like most states, is severely short on doctors, nurses, and other health care provessionals. That shortage only gets worse…I think the average age of nurses is something like 48 years old…as the years pass. Who exactly is going to provide care for these newly insured. What will happen if the law plays out like Obama says it will, is that a lot of people may have an insurance or medicaid card and no where to go. How exactly is that health care reform?
md
July 12th, 2012
11:18 am
“md, I’ve been trying to get your 10:56 point about “provide and promote” across to these people for years.”
Oh they understand it…..they just don’t want to hear it……..
md
July 12th, 2012
11:19 am
“I wonder what the cost is of treating obesity related illness?”
Can one say “ban the BIG Gulp”……mark my words…..it’s coming…….
td
July 12th, 2012
11:20 am
ElephantWhip
July 12th, 2012
11:13 am
Argument will not work. State already have the flexibility to modify the rules of eligibility for all welfare programs. Example: SCHIP allows the states to provide Medicaid at different income levels. You caould receive Peachcare for your children making $23,000 per year in Georgia but the go to Alabama and take a job for $18,000 and be over the income limit.
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
11:20 am
ElephantWhip @ 11:13:
1. The SCOTUS ruling did not find a “constitutional right to healthcare coverage.” It said the federal government has the constitutional power to tax people who don’t buy health insurance. Big, big, big difference.
2. The very policy we are talking about — letting states choose whether to participate in the expansion — was a remedy for the unconstitutional coercion that the justices themselves created. I have full confidence they would not turn around and declare that they’d blown a constitutional issue in creating their remedy.
3. It’s a moot point, because states already provide Medicaid at differing levels of income. If you live in California, you can get on Medicaid at a higher income level than in Georgia; if you move here, you will lose it. If there’s a class-action lawsuit just waiting to happen on this basis, it’s been waiting an awful long time.
Doug B
July 12th, 2012
11:22 am
You left one thing out of your calculations, Kyle: the good done for those people that get healthcare that wouldn’t already have it. Think of the human pain and suffering alleviated. Pretend it’s your mother getting that healthcare and then put a price tag on it.
td
July 12th, 2012
11:22 am
iggy
July 12th, 2012
11:16 am
“Georgia taxpayers of treating smoking related lllness.”
I wonder what the cost is of treating obesity related illness?
Yes let us expand it to any lifestyle choice that could effect your health. Drinking? Risky sexual behavior?
Some people are stupid
July 12th, 2012
11:23 am
Kyle-
Interesting read. I would leave to see all the information when it becomes available. I agree that knowing how much each thing cost is good informatino to have. I am a little worried about the market average suggestion though. If I feel as if I have a good doctor and he charges way more than the market average, I feel like those with not a lot of disposable income will be forced to change to another doctor jsut so they are covered.
AmVet
July 12th, 2012
11:24 am
Speaking of smoking related illness, remember when the tobacco industry used to be the darling of the anti-science conservatives?
Back then the deniers were into “Cigarettes don’t kill people!”
Now they actually posit that man’s role in climate change is a non-factor.
Some things never really change…
jose
July 12th, 2012
11:25 am
My point in posting about smoking related illness is that we are ALREADY paying a tax on smoking (and obesity) in that $100 plus million a year of our tax dollars that could be spent elsewhere are instead treating the consequence of bad choices not our own.
ElephantWhip
July 12th, 2012
11:26 am
jose:
Maybe the powers-that-be in med school and licensing will quit keeping the supply of doctors suppressed. And don’t tell me they keep the number low because they only want the best-of-the-best as doctors. I know two people who went through the med school app process and were highly qualified. They had to apply twice (which is apparently a regular occurrence) and they did not get any more highly-qualified the second go-round when they were accepted.
Shortages in high-demand professionals drives the salary up. Scarcity in places in med school drive the tuition up. Under the guise of controlling the quality of doctors (and I don’t know how effective these quality controls are based on my family’s personal experience with doctors), much money is made by keeping the demand high (demand for the education and then demand for doctors’ services after they are practicing) and the supply (seats at med school and number of practicing doctors) low.
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
11:28 am
Some people @ 11:14: See what you think of this idea.
iggy
July 12th, 2012
11:28 am
“Yes let us expand it to any lifestyle choice that could effect your health. Drinking? Risky sexual behavior?”
That is precisely what the govt wants. However and due to political correctness, certain demographics will be granted waivers.
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
11:31 am
Doug B @ 11:22: I didn’t leave it out of my calculations. But that good has to be balanced by the fact that some people with access now will find it harder and harder to get care if the expansion leads to more doctors declining Medicaid patients.
See, the point of my column is not to explain how we can screw the most people. The point is to say that the Medicaid expansion is a bad idea on many levels, and all of us — the people who need coverage, and the people who would pay for it — would be better-served not to pour more money into a deteriorating system.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 12th, 2012
11:31 am
“It someone has suffered some harm due to negligence, how can you put a limit on how much they should get. You can’t predict the future and what this person would have done if said event had not happened.”
Some people, of course you can. Instead of setting a fixed amount for medical costs that might be anticipated, you give them a fixed (and extremely limited) amount for pain and suffering, then work up a contract with the doctor’s insurance company that will provide a health care policy (paid by the company or doctor) based on the long-term needs of the person affected. No limits, but ONLY for the related problem, subject to independent review. The agreement would state that if the provider were no longer able, they would be required to move that policy to one that could.
That’s what I would do TODAY if anyone in my family were injured due to negligence or malpractice, and I probably wouldn’t need a jury to make that happen, either.
jose
July 12th, 2012
11:32 am
Elephantwhip….whether or not your points are accurate, we have a real shortage now and even if med schoiols adapted as you propose, it would not have an impact on the shortage for a minimum of 5 years and as many as 10 in the case of a surgeon. On the topic of tort reform, I know a handful of physicians who pay more than $120,000 a year in malpractice insurance premiums…just the premiums!…and they have no record of commiting medical errors. Again, the health care “reform” bill totally missed the opportunity to do anything about a significant cost driver.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 12th, 2012
11:35 am
Shorter, AmVet.
Conservatives=Bad, Liberals=Good!
You may now return to the Children’s Table. You’ve covered everything you’re going to contribute to the discussion today.
JDW
July 12th, 2012
11:37 am
@Kyle…”proving once again to be the king of counterfactuals.”
Really? What constitutional moves has this state has made in the last 10 years to actually address access to and cost of healthcare issues.
md
July 12th, 2012
11:38 am
“Now they actually posit that man’s role in climate change is a non-factor.”
Now now Am…..don’t be throwing out talking points like “want dirty air and dirty water”. There is a huge difference in saying man’s role is a non-factor and man’s role is the only factor. Many are smart enough to realize it more than likely falls somewhere in between…………
md
July 12th, 2012
11:40 am
“My point in posting about smoking related illness is that we are ALREADY paying a tax on smoking (and obesity) in that $100 plus million a year of our tax dollars that could be spent elsewhere are instead treating the consequence of bad choices not our own.”
Unfortunately, the only way to stop that is to remove all the bad choices…..bye bye KFC…..
Some people are stupid
July 12th, 2012
11:42 am
I don’t know about that one. The ponit of workers comp is to pay for accidents that happened in or relating to the workplace.
I see a medical lawsuit as more of a penalty for doing something wrong. If you cut off my pinky toe versus remove an ingrown toenail, then you should have some sort of punishment. I would need more information on how everything would work before I could say that’s a good idea.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 12th, 2012
11:44 am
“There is a huge difference in saying man’s role is a non-factor and man’s role is the only factor.”
Or even a major factor, md.
But let’s not get in the way of a good whine . . .
md
July 12th, 2012
11:45 am
My Doc once told me I could eat anything I wanted to…………as long as it didn’t taste good.
ElephantWhip
July 12th, 2012
11:47 am
ElephantWhip @ 11:13:
1. The SCOTUS ruling did not find a “constitutional right to healthcare coverage.” It said the federal government has the constitutional power to tax people who don’t buy health insurance. Big, big, big difference.
And to subsidize those who cannot afford it through Medicare. So the states are preventing me from receiving my benefit from the feds of subsidized health care.
2. The very policy we are talking about — letting states choose whether to participate in the expansion — was a remedy for the unconstitutional coercion that the justices themselves created. I have full confidence they would not turn around and declare that they’d blown a constitutional issue in creating their remedy.
A little illogical.. It’s no more unconstitutional than making you pay your income tax now. No need to address.
3. It’s a moot point, because states already provide Medicaid at differing levels of income. If you live in California, you can get on Medicaid at a higher income level than in Georgia; if you move here, you will lose it. If there’s a class-action lawsuit just waiting to happen on this basis, it’s been waiting an awful long time.
This is your best argument. It’s got me thinking. It will probably come down to the language of the regulations.
sambo
July 12th, 2012
11:48 am
sambo, needs money from this hes us it to pay crack bill
Mash
July 12th, 2012
11:49 am
Kyle,
I’m truly stunned that Georgia hasn’t taken the rather large bone that the SCOTUS has thrown the States and simpley opted out, like the rest of the States that challenged the medicaid expansion in the first place.
Is this decision to opt out or not left to the sole descretion of Governor Deal? I’m just wondering if attempting to voice our concerns with our local representatives would do any good. Or are we stuck we voicing our outrage to the less accessible Governor?
If Governor Deal ends up accepting this expansion for Georgia, I certainly hope he has some primary opposition in 2014 because I’m sure there will be plenty of voters that would like to vote him out of office based on this huge decision alone.
@@
July 12th, 2012
11:52 am
When something’s “free”, people tend to ignore cost.
Being pro-active when it comes to private healthcare can offer rewards overall.
I’ve dealt with a shoulder injury for some time. As the pain intensified, I finally went to the doctor. They wanted to send me for physical therapy. My response?
“Are you kidding? Like I’m gonna approve the expenditure of big bucks to have some PT put me through pain?” “No thanks! Give me a list of exercises I can do at home.”
The orthopaedist, obviously having dealt with patients who fail to follow through, questioned whether I would actually do the exercises, to which I responded…”Why the heck wouldn’t I…I’m experiencing limited mobility and excruciating pain?”
It’s that personal motivation thingy. I was amazed at the results after just three days.
ElephantWhip
July 12th, 2012
11:54 am
Mash, et al.
It’s amazing how big money can make perfectly normal people relish the idea of preventing poor people from getting medical coverage (all the while squeezing every dime out of everyone).
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
July 12th, 2012
11:56 am
Bad idea all around, decline the medicare expansion. It seems that most ideas conceived by the Feds eventually turn into poorly run, under financed, poorly thought out, disasters. Why these elected elites think they know how to solve every problem in America, always amazed me.
When I was in Management training, I was taught to investigate the problem, sit down with those effected, and brain storm solutions. Seems our elected elite, do little of that. Because they can borrow these massive amounts of money, they think that gives them carte blanche authority to implement the solution.
Someone needs to start over, first by talking with the Doctors, the patients, the insurance companies, the hospitals and clinics, and put together some health care strategy that is affordable, sustainable, and makes economic sense.
The immediate response for the left to all ideas for radical change, like this or tax reform is the tired ole Oblamer Mantra of “We ain’t going back”. So, we continue to head full speed toward insolvency and hard times for all.
Auntie Christ
July 12th, 2012
12:04 pm
md @ 1056: Considering the fact that words actually do have meaning, one should notice the the first objective clearly states to “provide”, while the second objective clearly states to “promote”…..there is a difference and it was put there for a reason
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I recognize there is a difference between the words, but I fail to see how it has any bearing on the argument I made concerning the disparity in spending on armies and spending on the citizenry’s well being. I guess you admire n korea, china and the other tin horn countries that let their citizens die from lack of care, so they can show how big their cojones/armies are.
Promote: To contribute to the progress or growth of; to further. To urge the adoption of; to advocate for.
Provide: 1. To furnish; supply 2.. To set down as a stipulation.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Constitution urges the adoption of measures for our common welfare .Obamacare does the same, therefore it follows the Constitution.
Jefferson
July 12th, 2012
12:05 pm
You are wrong, GA needs to comply.
Georgia, The " New Mississippi "
July 12th, 2012
12:05 pm
The participating states will figure out how to make this work to the advantage of its citizens. The allocation for non participating states will go to those states and make healthcare affordable and available to its citizens. The Johnny Reb states will keep doing what they have been doing since the The Johnny Reb Rebellion of 1862.
Jefferson
July 12th, 2012
12:08 pm
Get over the fact that its not free and will need to be paid for and plan for the fundings is what adult americans would do.
Dusty
July 12th, 2012
12:14 pm
Seems like so many basics are missing here or maybe I missed them
Medicaid in Georgia is already loaded and cannot afford more participants. The state is not in a fiscal condition to funish more funds. Taking from the Feds is just taking money from our debt ridden central government. Debt here and debt there and add more debt is not sensible.
Doctors like to make a “living” like everybody else. Don’t expect them to work for free. Do you?
Cut expenses? Yeah. Buy your medical equipment for brain scans, MRI , etc at GOODWILL. Let the nurse’s aide do surgery. Reuse OR “tools & supplies” and ignore infection. Rinse off those rubber gloves. Lotsa ways to cut expenses for healthcare.
I have great compassion for all those people dying in the streets but the fact is I haven’t seen any. Not here but in Africa, India , etc. etc. Americans are now getting ready to ruin one of the best heathcare systems in the world.
I will not assist those ruining what is good and expecting no one to die. There is no healthcare in this world that stops dying and liberals will complain and blame about their fate to the last minute (and probably saying “Bush did it!).
They BOTH suck
July 12th, 2012
12:17 pm
Has anyone been able to provide the following and not a link from an advocacy group. “I want hold my breath waiting”
“Please provide link to that tort reform survey that indicates doctors nation wide claim 30%. Would hope it would not be some advocacy group but some org that we can somewhat agree on. ”
Hilarious that the request clearly stated what was asked for, yet all that was posted was the exact opposite.
Nothing more what would be considered a non biased source.
Typical.
Good day
DawgDad
July 12th, 2012
12:18 pm
Somehow, despite the inhumane horror and anguish inflicted upon us by uncaring, greedy, racist Republicans, I and my forefathers have survived and raised families WITHOUT any of the benefits of Obamacare.
The issues in our health care system were NOT screaming for thousands of pages of legislation and regulation, thousands of bureaucrats on the public payroll, thousands more IRS agents and employees, millions of people-hours of relentless demogoguery and political maneuvering, and billions of dollars more pressure on the National Debt and State budgets, all of which will have untold but certain serious unintended consequences on what was WORKING before.
The costs to our economy and freedom are far too great to allow Obamacare to gain a foothold of acceptance. It was a political creation and it must remain in-play as such. Obamacare is not the end for its supporters, it’s the beginning, and it’s the wrong solution.
getalife
July 12th, 2012
12:20 pm
The gop opting out will give us Canadian health care.
“Records Suggest Romney Stayed With Bain Years After He Claims”
Slick willard can’t tell the truth about anything.
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
12:20 pm
Kyle or @@
Can either of you tell me what a “dummycrat” is?
Is it a general reference, a name being called to those who do not fit a certain ideology or maybe just the lack of intelligence and inability of the blogger to post without childish bs?
Thanks for the clarification
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
12:23 pm
It will be watered down, however Obamacare is here to stay in some form or fashion.
We can argue all day, but Obamacare is with us.
Calling names, huffing and puffing is not going to make it go away.
It would behoove the Republican Congress and what will be a reelected Obama to work together to improve on a flawed law that needs work
Chris Sanchez
July 12th, 2012
12:31 pm
Georgia, and every other state with any sense, will decline to participate in Medicaid expansion. If states determine that investing additional funding into healthcare for the poor, then they have the ability to do so now without the strings that come with the federal government’s borrowed money.
The best way to help those in need is to get the economy growing and reduce the unemployment rate and provide opportunities for them to develop marketable skills. There are some great non-profit organizations in Georgia who could receive funding to assist with this if people would take there mission seriously.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
July 12th, 2012
12:32 pm
Skip: How bout a 35th vote, think that will fix things?
————
If it occurs after January 20th of next year it will.
td
July 12th, 2012
12:35 pm
ElephantWhip
July 12th, 2012
11:47 am
ElephantWhip @ 11:13:
“And to subsidize those who cannot afford it through Medicare. So the states are preventing me from receiving my benefit from the feds of subsidized health care.”
And the great thing about this country is that you have the right to live where ever you think best fits your needs.
Dusty
July 12th, 2012
12:35 pm
DawgDad @ 12:18
Well said, Dad. Good to hear from those who do not believe that everything should be “given” to them by others for a better life. Independence is being pushed aside.
Just Say No to ObamaCare
July 12th, 2012
12:37 pm
Just say NO to ObamaCare!
getalife
July 12th, 2012
12:37 pm
“While Republicans lambast the cost of implementing health care reform, a new report shows that their efforts to repeal the law have come at a major cost to taxpayers — to the tune of nearly $50 million.” Aol.
What happened to cutting spending?
@@
July 12th, 2012
12:41 pm
Uh Oh:
Kyle or @@
Can either of you tell me what a “dummycrat” is?
It’s a word…just a word.
Do you take personal offense to it? If so, don’t look at it…don’t draw attention to it.
You leftists are way too sensitive.
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
12:44 pm
@@
Just looking for clarification. Figured it was due to the inability of the blogger not to be childish.
Thanks for the reply.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
July 12th, 2012
12:45 pm
off topic: the banker hits just keep on coming:
Revealed: JPMorgan Paid $190,000 Annually to Spouse of Bank’s Top Regulator
http://www.alternet.org/economy/156259/revealed:_jpmorgan_paid_$190,000_annually_to_spouse_of_bank’s_top_regulator
Dusty
July 12th, 2012
12:45 pm
getalife,
In answer to your question: What happened to cutting spending?
It happened over three years ago when Obama was elected president. Hope & CHARGE IT!
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
July 12th, 2012
12:45 pm
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
12:20 pm
Can either of you tell me what a “dummycrat” is?
It’s the same thing as a dimwitocrat, if that helps any.
Jefferson
July 12th, 2012
12:46 pm
Expect situations if you don’t.
curious
July 12th, 2012
12:46 pm
The $50 million will help save Billions, maybe Trillions.
That’s the same rationale I use when I buy my lottery tickets.
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
12:47 pm
@@
Thank you. You prove my point so well.
carlosgvv
July 12th, 2012
12:47 pm
Kyle – 9:29
You still believe high powered attorneys would appear pro bono before the Supreme Court for the State of Georgia?
OY VEY!!!
Kyle, why would you believe this? WHY IN THE WORLD would you believe such a foolish thing?
Hillbilly D
July 12th, 2012
12:49 pm
Washington takes over Medicaid completely and passes k-12 education totally to the states.
Given the current climate, I think that’s about the only possible, workable solution, right now. Probably the best of a lot of bad choices.
Hillbilly D
July 12th, 2012
12:52 pm
I should add to my 12:49, that I think K-12 education should be under the states, anyway.
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
1:02 pm
carlosgvv: We’ve been through this before. I showed you a link to the documents that show what the state DOJ pays out to contract attorneys…you said you didn’t believe trust the document…
ElephantWhip
July 12th, 2012
1:04 pm
A follow up on my brief research on Google re: how states might be forced to pay for people who received the benefit in another state who accepted medicaid.
Writing for the majority, Justice Brennan stated, “An indigent who desires to migrate, resettle, find a new job, start a new life will doubtless hesitate if he knows that he must risk making the move without the possibility of falling back on state welfare assistance during his first year of residence, when his need may be most acute.” Shapiro v. Thompson, at 629, 89 S.Ct. 1322
I realize that this situation assumes that the indigent would qualify for state welfare after a year, whereas in a future AHCA situation the benefit would never be available even after a year in a state who did not raise its Medicare income level. Nevertheless, this language looks workable. I have not found anything directly on point about qualifying for Medicare in one state and not in another. Maybe it’s just never been tried. The Shapiro case is from the 60s and it was cited in a 2007 for the quote above.
Just watch when the law goes into effect and someone moves and loses coverage. The lawsuit is coming.
ElephantWhip
July 12th, 2012
1:15 pm
td:
Are you suggesting I move to Mass.?
Fortunately, I have health insurance. I just care about those who don’t.
carlosvv:
The attorneys probably did do it pro bono in GA. They are still rolling in the $$$ fromt the Voter ID suits.
Just Say No to ObamaCare
July 12th, 2012
1:15 pm
Most of the problems in health care were created by the idiots in Washington, they are the ones who made the emergency departments havens for drug seeking losers, illegals, and other assorted deadbeats. Since Washington cannot bring itself to admit to a mistake, they pass other reckless laws to hide their original error. Just check with any ER in the country, they will have a list of frequent flying drug seekers, and guess what? The same names appear on lists for several hospitals, the druggies are making the rounds on a schedule! With free medicaid coverage, the frequency will increase. My solution would be to give the scum a lethal overdose, but my legal staff has informed me that would be considered murder in 95% of the country. Always a catch 22…….
Jefferson
July 12th, 2012
1:20 pm
If Ronmey belived in his country, AMERICA — he would put his money where his mouth is. He like many here, including the host don’t want a better America, they just want their version that can only exist in their mind. Too bad it don’t and won’t work like that. The times they are a changin’, Roll with the changes.
“We will take the cloths and food, but what’s money ?” ….Green Berets
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
1:22 pm
Just say no
Stop being a Richard.
You were not referring to me
Hillbilly D
July 12th, 2012
1:23 pm
“We will take the cloths and food, but what’s money ?” ….Green Berets
Where is that quote from? Just curious.
Jus' da facts, ma'am
July 12th, 2012
1:27 pm
I just LOVE all the Doom & Gloom Faux News drones here talking about how bad things are:
Warren Buffet on CNBC: ” . . the U.S. economy is still doing better than “virtually any other big economy” around the world.”
The Fortune 500 generated a total of $824.5 Billion in earnings last year, up 16.4% over 2010 and beats the record of $785 Billion set in 2006 during a roaring economy!
fed up
July 12th, 2012
1:48 pm
Georgia must not be as bad off as the taxpayers are led to believe. This state will bring in immigrants/refugees and give them Medicaid after being here for one month before they will any taxpayers. How come we do not hear of a cut in this area? Where do the taxpayers get a break for this? They pay on a federal, state and local level.
td
July 12th, 2012
1:50 pm
fed up
July 12th, 2012
1:48 pm
“Georgia must not be as bad off as the taxpayers are led to believe. This state will bring in immigrants/refugees and give them Medicaid”
Federal policy
carlosgvv
July 12th, 2012
1:59 pm
Kyle – 1:02
First it’s pro bono.
Now it’s “what the state DOG pays”.
Which is it?
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
July 12th, 2012
2:01 pm
Warren Buffet on CNBC: ” . . the U.S. economy is still doing better than “virtually any other big economy” around the world.”
Yep, Warren should have been a combat surgeon, I can hear him now. “What’s with the tears and the sad look, you only lost your legs, three of your fellow soldiers were killed in that explosion. Cheer up fellow, you were the lucky one.”
td
July 12th, 2012
2:10 pm
The one thing that Kyle mentioned that has not really been discussed is the cost to the state and where is the money going to come from? Right now 70% of the states budget goes to Education and Medicaid. This recession has stripped the rest of the state government down to bare bones (see the latest blogs about wait times at DSS for an example). We the people of Georgia are not going to raise taxes (you can put that one in the bank) so what do you what programs do you libs want to cut to come up with an additional $1 to $2 billion? How many more children do we want to add to our classrooms? How many fewer police do we want on the streets? Firefighters? Child protective services workers? Let us add here that to put an addition 650,000 people all the rolls would mean hiring an additional 650 to 100 caseworkers for DFCS so where are we going to get that money from?
kelly
July 12th, 2012
2:17 pm
I’m glad to hear the lawyers worked pro bono. Maybe if doctors worked pro bono for a small percentage of needy patients I would feel more sympathetic.
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
2:19 pm
kelly
There are doctors right here in the Atlanta area that work do volunteer work or for a reduced fee.
AmVet
July 12th, 2012
2:35 pm
You may now return to the Children’s Table.
Looks like Tib is gonna have to get yet another death penalty to learn his lesson.
Rule #1. Anyone who comes onto the blog with PERSONAL ATTACKS and little to nothing of substance to say will be banned permanently.
Here’s to hoping it comes sooner than later…
md
July 12th, 2012
2:37 pm
“I guess you admire n korea, china and the other tin horn countries that let their citizens die from lack of care, so they can show how big their cojones/armies are.”
And you just made the argument for our defense spending………which is supposed to be “provided”. And then remeber that to counter a big army such as those you listed, one might want to have one as big or bigger…..and then remember that Pearl Harbor was a surprise attack and that the British never thought Hitler would do much of anything……..
All it takes is one of the wacko’s running those big armies to make a wacko decision…..as the past indicates does happen.
As for the promote part of Obamacare……sorry, it has moved into the provide (forced) realm……
Jefferson
July 12th, 2012
2:37 pm
Hill – The movie Green Barets, with John Wayne. A scene where they were helping some South Viets to get info.
Steve
July 12th, 2012
2:39 pm
“We the people of Georgia are not going to raise taxes”
Hence, Georgia will forever remain a wasteland state where only the wealthy prosper.
I grew up in New England and we paid taxes yet reaped the benefits of clean communities, solid infrastructure, excellent public schools and colleges.
The mentality down here is of such ignorance and greed it makes me sick.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
July 12th, 2012
2:40 pm
Speaking of pro bono, has there ever been a case of a dentist working pro bono. I was talking with a poor working man this AM, who is having extensive dental work done in the low thousands because he was never able to afford dental work in the past. Most of the poor people I run into, are more in need of Dental work than medical treatment.
There are no “free” emergency rooms to visit for dental problems. Is dental work supposed to be covered by medicaid?
I’ve never understood why a crown costs $1200 and why poor people are forced to pull their teeth, because some dentist wants to make $1000 for prepping a tooth and installing a crown. I know his time is valuable and his education expensive, but $500/hr?
Not sure who is at fault here, but there are a lot of problems out there facing people who are unprepared and unmotivated to take responsibility for earning a living.
Just don’t think we can continue to make everything right, for everyone.
md
July 12th, 2012
2:42 pm
“If Ronmey belived in his country, AMERICA — he would put his money where his mouth is.”
I believe he has, one may want to check on his out of pocket expenditures in the last 2 races.
As for his commitment……not too sure how one can question that when the guy is taking one of the crappiest jobs in the country (imo) with a pay cut to boot……………
md
July 12th, 2012
2:44 pm
“I grew up in New England and we paid taxes yet reaped the benefits of clean communities, solid infrastructure, excellent public schools and colleges. ”
Which is why half those states now live in the south and their migration numbers continue to decline as the cost of living continues to soar??
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
July 12th, 2012
2:45 pm
Steve
The mentality down here is of such ignorance and greed it makes me sick.
You chose to live here and if you change your mind, Delta is ready when you are.
As for NE, great place to visit, but don’t want to live there. Taxes are incredibly high, too many rules and regulations, the population much too dense, and the winters are terrible.
md
July 12th, 2012
2:46 pm
Never did understand why people move to another area and then belittle the area they moved to by harping on why where they came from was/is so great.
If it’s that darn wonderful, why are they here????
How Inciteful Is That!
July 12th, 2012
2:46 pm
As usual, there’s Kyle’s rendition and there’s a more complete picture.
MarkV
July 12th, 2012
2:47 pm
Dusty @12:14 pm
“Doctors like to make a “living” like everybody else.”
Last time I wrote exactly the same you accused me of “indicting doctors.”
“Don’t expect them to work for free. Do you?”
And then you lectured me about doctors working sometime for free.
Inconsistency, Thou Name is Dusty.
Jefferson
July 12th, 2012
2:48 pm
md, he just banks offshore — why do you reckon ?
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
2:51 pm
carlosgvv @ 1:59: (Sigh) The state DOJ does pay some attorneys to work on some cases. The document listing these payments does not show any for the attorneys working specifically on the Obamacare case.
Liz
July 12th, 2012
2:52 pm
When my poor adult son badly broke his arm, my eyes were opened to what adults in poverty had to deal with. The emergency room would not set his arm, and two weeks later, working hard every single day to find a doctor that would offer him “terms” he still could not find a doctor who did not require full payment upfront to set his compound displaced fracture.
He could have easily ended up cripple for life, but for one kind doctor who offered him an incredibly discount, out of the goodness of his heart.
People are under the false impression that all you have to do is be poor, and go to any emergency room and your health care needs will be met. Bad circumstances will teach you otherwise, the hard way.
Our health care system is broken. If you don’t feel it, thank God. But, please don’t be inhumane. I don’t think anyone here is demanding rights to equal healthcare, but setting broken arms, getting chemo therapy, and other basic life sustaining treatments should be covered whether you have the means to pay or not, at the time the service is NEEDED.
md
July 12th, 2012
2:52 pm
“md, he just banks offshore — why do you reckon ?”
When I was growing up my Dad called it not putting all ones eggs in one basket………..sounds smart to me.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
July 12th, 2012
2:52 pm
md
Then they tell us how they did it up north. I guess they hope they can talk us into changing into what they just voluntarily fled.
md
July 12th, 2012
2:55 pm
“As usual, there’s Kyle’s rendition and there’s a more complete picture.”
Well that link certainly doesn’t………no mention whatsoever of the added costs to the states administratively……which will add millions.
As I asked earlier and td asked above, what you going to cut in all these balanced budget states??
The left never has an answer except…..but, but, but we need to do it.
Guess what, the worst kind of program one can implement is an unaffordable one, no matter how much good it is supposed to do.
Steve
July 12th, 2012
2:56 pm
When I read the responses in here it’s hard not to imagine the banjo song from Deliverance playing in the background.
Steve
July 12th, 2012
2:57 pm
Who’s fleeing from up north? Maybe from the weather, but not from the quality of life up there compared to here.
Just Say No to ObamaCare
July 12th, 2012
2:59 pm
Liz – I seriously doubt your won was turned away with a broken arm, but let us assume that is true. What value do you and your son place on having two functioning arms? You could skip beer and cigarettes for a year, that would raise some money, skip the mortgage or rent payment, eat out less, forgo the illegal drugs. But I suspect you did not want to pay anything, so I assume you place no value on two functioning arms.
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
2:59 pm
Inciteful @ 2:46: Only if by “a more complete picture” you mean something you find more agreeable.
First, the CBPP analysis relies on the CBO estimates about how much the feds will pay. And, indeed, if Congress sticks to the plan, those CBO estimates about the feds covering 93% of the costs of the expansion may well turn out to be true. But as I wrote in the OP, given the dire condition of the federal budget, it’s more likely that Congress will not be able to stick to the plan. Which means more of the burden would shift to the states.
Second, the CBPP analysis says states’ spending will increase by only 2.8%. That might be true for some states. Georgia, however, expects its Medicaid costs to rise by $4.5B over 10 years, or $450M per year on average, which is 2.8% of $16.1B. We spend only $19.3B on the entire state budget, about 55% of it on education. So, either Georgia’s estimates are wildly off, or the national average CBPP forecasts is wildly different from what will happen specifically in our case.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
July 12th, 2012
2:59 pm
Steve
Well you have come to live amongst us, so better learn to love that banjer music, or hop a Greyhound.
md
July 12th, 2012
3:02 pm
“Bad circumstances will teach you otherwise, the hard way. ”
Unfortunately, that applies in many other areas, and tends to come down to choices….
I didn’t see you mention why your son had no hc, so I won’t assume.
But the same can happen when one chooses not to have flood insurance, or not have enough medical coverage on their auto when they accidentally run somebody over, or have zero boaters insurance when they are jet skiing through bathers on lake lanier, or choosing to not have renters insurance in an apartment, etc etc…….
At some point, folks have to get a grip on their own actions/choices and many begin with the choice to drop out of school and be an idiot…………
Hillbilly D
July 12th, 2012
3:03 pm
Jefferson @ 2:37
Thanks, I thought that’s what you meant but wasn’t sure. I have a distant relative who was an officer in the Green Berets. He told me that he was trained to rob banks. I assume that was to finance clandestine missions but he wouldn’t really talk further.
Most of the poor people I run into, are more in need of Dental work than medical treatment.
Dental care is also a very important part of overall health. Any number of serious problems can start with the dental stuff. My old dentist, who is now retired, does do a good bit of free work for low income people, as his time and health allows.
The mentality down here is of such ignorance and greed it makes me sick
You don’t even have to wait for Delta. I-85 is open 24/7. And as for the NE, y’all are the ones who burned witches; we never did that.
md
July 12th, 2012
3:03 pm
Then why you here Steve??
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
July 12th, 2012
3:08 pm
Hillbilly D
Glad to know there is one. The guy I was talking about said he never got the work done because the Dentist wanted cash, no credit. He said he would have paid him, but was never given a choice, just cash up front. Not meaning to indict all Dentist, but just wondering if they were all that way. Seems Dental prices have escalated tremendously in the last 20 years. I fear it is the advent of Dental Insurance.
MarkV
July 12th, 2012
3:10 pm
Whenever the subject of the blog is healthcare, most arguments are about money for “programs.” From which box the money should or should not be taken. As if healthcare was an optional expense, such as building or not building a monument, or going or not going to Mars. What gets forgotten is that the major part of the expenses, whether it is through ObamaCare, Medicare, Medicaid, goes to treating people who need care because of illnesses or injuries.
Dusty writes: “I have great compassion for all those people dying in the streets but the fact is I haven’t seen any. Not here but in Africa, India , etc. etc.” Then, why do we debate and worry about Medicaid? According to Dusty, there are no such people in great need of medical treatment, so apparently the federal Medicaid money would not even be spent and needed.
What the debate should be about is mainly the cost of medical care, which is so much higher here than in other developed countries. Then we would realize that universal health insurance, whether in the form of a single payer system or as attempted by the mandate of ObamaCare, is one of the most important tools for cutting the cost through preventive care, early diagnosis and avoidance of the misuse of emergency care.
How Inciteful Is That!
July 12th, 2012
3:10 pm
Kyle’s argument is that getting something from the fed to cover more of our uninsured poverty-stricken population in doctor’s offices is far worse than getting nothing more to offset their cost on our strained hospital system when they show up in the emergency room and they are required to be stabilized anyway, by law, regardless of their ability to pay. Or perhaps Kyle has an Alpharetta poll that gives us some solutions that doctors will buy into that he’s not mentioning.
Actually, what I find sad is how many poverty-striken uninsured people we have just in Georgia. Too bad Georgia has not been able to come up with something new and different on its own to address that. It’s not like they have not had time to do something. Perhaps Tom Price and Paul Broun have secret plans to open up free clinics all across the state and fund them using charitable contributions. That’s the ticket. How about another tax cut. Those things are like elixirs. They fix anything.
Jefferson
July 12th, 2012
3:13 pm
md, did your dad use American banks ? Seems like a President of the USA would.
Sam
July 12th, 2012
3:13 pm
This is the Republican motto: I’ve got mine, so eff you.
How Inciteful Is That!
July 12th, 2012
3:14 pm
Did I forget to mention. My wife’s doctor said he went to Costa Rica for his dental work and saved a bundle. Now there’s an option the state may not have tried. Ship those in need to South America for affordable care and then ship them back. Perhaps the Medicaid money from the fed will fully cover that cost and maybe even have enough left over to throw in a few free meals.
How Inciteful Is That!
July 12th, 2012
3:19 pm
It seems like only yesterday that Kyle found a CBO analysis suited his needs to a tee. Funny how some people’s views change indeed.
md
July 12th, 2012
3:20 pm
“As if healthcare was an optional expense”
Actually, it can be…..but it requires more choices. Sure, we can’t prevent some of the biggies that may get us, but there are many, many out there that we can control…..but choose not to.
Many of our own choices can and will lead directly to some form of illness that could have been preventable……..smoking, drinking, unhealthy eating, lack of exercise, drugs, and on and on………and at some point, we need to be held accountable for our own actions vs trying to distribute those consequences on to others that may have made much better choices…….
If I choose to smoke, I don’t see how it is right for me to make my non-smoking neighbor pay for my healthcare……
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
July 12th, 2012
3:21 pm
How inciteful
Ship those in need to South America for affordable care and then ship them back.
Amazing isn’t it when you have competition and free market constraints on prices. Someone I read about talked about the much less expensive medical treatment in Brazil, and how she took advantage of it. Paying your own way brings down prices, just look at Lasix surgery in America.
How Inciteful Is That!
July 12th, 2012
3:22 pm
Kyle,
I heard, for example, in Florida’s case, it was indeed the state’s estimates that were wildly off. I heard the same thing for other states as well so I would not be surprised to hear the same in Georgia’s case.
md
July 12th, 2012
3:23 pm
“md, did your dad use American banks ? Seems like a President of the USA would.”
My Dad didn’t grow up in a global economy……like it or not we are…….smart business is just that, smart business.
Hillbilly D
July 12th, 2012
3:24 pm
Rafe
Having talked to some people who work in dental offices, one a good friend, they say that in dental education in the last couple decades, there has been an emphasis on teaching the business side of things. That’s a double edged sword. They need to be efficient and make a profit like any other business but some of them also take from that a heavy skewing toward the money side of things and away from the care side. In my own experience, they wanted to give me a crown and I said, “It cost too damn much, so just pull it”. They didn’t want to do that, so here it is a few years later and I still have the tooth and no crown. I’ve survived so far.
When I was working in a car dealership, it was preached to us to be “more like your dentist”. What they meant was keep sending out those reminder cards every 6 months or whatever, to keep those people coming in for service, etc.
I’ve seen several things that I don’t like about healthcare in the last 40 years or so.
Remember back when eye doctors weren’t also in the business of selling glasses? In those days, they viewed it as unethical to sell glass because it had the potential to be a conflict of interest. In other words, if they told somebody they needed glasses, they didn’t stand to profit from it, so that person would feel they had an unbiased opinion.
I’ve dealt with doctors quite a bit in the last 4-5 years, just about weekly for a long part of that. I’ve noticed a big difference in doctors. If you can find a doctor who owns his own practice (either wholly or in partnership) they are pretty reasonable and seem more geared to the care side of things. They work with people and a lot of them do reduced rate and even free care, quite a bit. The other group of doctors are part of a corporate set-up. I’ve talked to many of these, who once had their own practices and sold out for various reasons. They all say they hate it and most are just marking time until they can retire. They have no say in the billing, they are constantly pressured to see more patients, etc. I’ve been to doctors where the guy was antsy if he was in the room more than 2 minutes. I know one doctor (known the family all my life) who was actually fired from a practice for “spending too much time with the patients”.
I don’t know what the answer to health care is but what we have now, is a damn mess.
How Inciteful Is That!
July 12th, 2012
3:25 pm
Oh well. Later, Kyle.
md
July 12th, 2012
3:26 pm
Inciteful……we still have yet to hear what you plan to cut when the states add all these folks to the rolls.
Care to give us a list or are you one of those that just like to complain about what gets cut??
What got cut in the last round…..education right? Up for cutting more education in exchange for medicaid?? That seems to be the choice………
@@
July 12th, 2012
3:27 pm
Uh Oh:
@@
Thank you. You prove my point so well.
Not sure how you came to that conclusion.
Were it not for your overly sensitive nature, I was gonna say “If you don’t know what one is, you just MIGHT be one” but I didn’t.
schnirt
How Inciteful Is That!
July 12th, 2012
3:31 pm
Before I go:
Amazing isn’t it when you have competition and free market constraints on prices. Someone I read about talked about the much less expensive medical treatment in Brazil, and how she took advantage of it. Paying your own way brings down prices, just look at Lasix surgery in America.
Actually, I believe it’s just a lower cost of living that has Costa Rica’s costs lower than they are here but if you have some evidence to present that shows their lower costs are driven by their free market as opposed to our over-regulated unfree market, I would love to see it.
Hillbilly D
July 12th, 2012
3:33 pm
Paying your own way brings down prices, just look at Lasix surgery in America.
That’s another pet peeve of mine. All my life, I’ve had very poor eyesight. Went to the same doctor from the time I was a small kid until I was a young adult. When I first started hearing about Lasix, I asked him about it. He said, “You really aren’t a good candidate for it, it wouldn’t do you much good”. So I said fine and forgot about it. 2-3 years later, he started doing the surgery and started telling me I ought to think about it. I was already getting irritated with the guy, so I changed doctors. Asked the new guy about it and guess what he said? “You really aren’t a good candidate for it, it wouldn’t do you much good”. So long story short, I still got that doctor, 20 plus years later, and he does the surgery now, too, but at least he still tells me it’d be a waste of money for me.
And on the subject of Lasix, I had a co-worker who did do the surgery (somewhere else) and was happy with it. However, they put him on a payment plan, no interest if you paid it off on in a year and full interest if you didn’t. Luckily, he was smart enough to read his contract, though, because if he made the payments in the agreement, for the year, they didn’t add up to the full amount, so he would’ve been hit with the interest at the end. I suppose that may be legal and I guess it’s anybody’s fault if they don’t read the fine print but still, it’s not right, in my way of thinking.
woodrow
July 12th, 2012
3:37 pm
You are against this extension of Medicaid for the poor because you think it will force lower costs for medical care (you said this, I did not). And I’m thinking you missed the point from the beginning. The problem, which you seem to have forgotten, is the spiraling high cost of medical care and the lack of access to health care due to expense. And once again, like a true Republican, you’ve muddled the issue because it doesn’t benefit you. To which, I say, this is a public service worthy of more serious consideration.
@@
July 12th, 2012
3:41 pm
Discount and/or free dental care is out there. Eleven in Atlanta.
DawgDad
July 12th, 2012
3:45 pm
“As if healthcare was an optional expense”
I guess that pretty much sums up why we have Obamacare. Imagine the shock these people will have when they discover just how “optional” the Federal Government considers their health care.
Skip
July 12th, 2012
3:49 pm
Delta’s ready when you are? That’s always a hoot, the on time schedule sucks. So no, they aren’t ready when I am.
Hillbilly D
July 12th, 2012
3:52 pm
Somebody may have already mentioned this but the clothing to be worn in the opening and closing ceremonies by the US Olympic team was made in China.
http://olympics.yardbarker.com/blog/olympics/article/team_usas_opening_and_closing_ceremony_uniforms_were_made_in_china/11206375
We’re putting the gun to our own head.
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
3:58 pm
@@
Thanks again for showing your unwillingness or inability
md
July 12th, 2012
3:59 pm
And what happens when we add a giant unaffordable entitlement program:
“I think if I had to tell you the probability, I’d say the chances are we are going over the fiscal cliff,” Bowles said. “I hate to say it, but I think that’s probably right.”
http://news.yahoo.com/erskine-bowles-going-over-fiscal-cliff-153722521–abc-news-politics.html
And Bowles is the democrat just for clarity.
md
July 12th, 2012
4:00 pm
“We’re putting the gun to our own head.”
Good luck getting the herd to understand how……..
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
4:01 pm
How hilarious that some of the same people who say “Delta is ready when you are” if a comment is made about GA, yet complain about Obama but are not on a Delta international flight leaving the US.
Same exact principle
Just sayn
Hillbilly D
July 12th, 2012
4:03 pm
Good luck getting the herd to understand how……..
You got to get the bell cow to understand before the herd will follow. I don’t have much hope of that happening, either.
Hillbilly D
July 12th, 2012
4:09 pm
Uh Oh
The comments about Georgia weren’t political in nature, they were about Georgia and her people. There is a difference.
md
July 12th, 2012
4:09 pm
“How hilarious that some of the same people who say “Delta is ready when you are” if a comment is made about GA, yet complain about Obama but are not on a Delta international flight leaving the US. ”
No Uh Oh, you must have missed the rest of the conversation…..it is no where near the same principle.
Now go back up and read the rest. For it to be the same, one would have to move into the US and then poo poo Obama………
MarkV
July 12th, 2012
4:10 pm
Hillbilly D @3:52 pm: “Somebody may have already mentioned this but the clothing to be worn in the opening and closing ceremonies by the US Olympic team was made in China.”
Obama’s mismanagement!
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
4:11 pm
md
whatever
When someone cries about a comment made about GA and says Delta is ready when you are, they need to follow their own advice about crying about Obama
plains and simple
good day
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
4:14 pm
Hillbilly D
Got ya. With that said, this is not the 1st time on this blog where I have read the Delta is ready when you are comment.
If it doesn’t apply in this case, my bad, but that statement is as weak as people that would knock the people of GA.
Even if the bloggers opinion is incorrect, there is no need for them to go anywhere. If they want to be unhappy in GA, let them be unhappy.
They can get glad in the same pants they got mad
md
July 12th, 2012
4:15 pm
Again Uh Oh…..the reference to Delta is to go BACK to whence one came if they don’t like their new surroundings……….
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
4:18 pm
md, my apologies for this particular time
With that said, it isn’t the 1st time I have read that comment. Maybe not from you, but it has been posted several times and yes some of it had to do directly with politics.
Since it wasn’t this time. I apologize for the inference
Hillbilly D
July 12th, 2012
4:19 pm
If they want to be unhappy in GA, let them be unhappy.
The problem with that is they make us unhappy, too. lol
Up here in the Hills, we get people who move in (some from other parts of GA, even) and the first thing they want to do is try to change this place to be like where they came from. So why the hell did they move in the first place?
Some folks move in here and mind their own business and do fine. When in Rome, you need to do as the Romans do. If you don’t like the way the Romans are, don’t live in Rome.
@@
July 12th, 2012
4:20 pm
Am I the only person who finds Uh Oh slightly off kilter, much like our “friend” fred?
Hillbilly D
July 12th, 2012
4:21 pm
*And by you I don’t mean you personally, Uh Oh.
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
4:21 pm
“If you don’t like the way the Romans are, don’t live in Rome.”
To a degree, yes, however we do not all live in tee peas or other Indian style housing.
Hillbilly D
July 12th, 2012
4:22 pm
@@
The world needs it’s off kilter folks, too………unless maybe you’re talking about Scots clothing. (IWH)
Darwin
July 12th, 2012
4:23 pm
Healthcare as a commodity to be bought and sold. Only in America.
Hillbilly D
July 12th, 2012
4:24 pm
however we do not all live in tee peas or other Indian style housing.
That’s true but the Cherokee took the land I live on from the Creeks (that’s how Blood Mountain gets its name) and neither group was here when DeSoto came through, so who do we emulate?
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
4:27 pm
HillBilly D
That is a great question?
@@
July 12th, 2012
4:27 pm
Hillbilly:
There was a time when I wanted to see Sean Connery’s kilt off.
Hillbilly D
July 12th, 2012
4:29 pm
@@ 4:27
That ain’t none of my business. (ISH)
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
4:29 pm
HillBilly D
If you do not mind me asking, are you in what is know considered the “outer” burbs or further up than that?
I’m sure as suburbanites moved to the “outer” burbs, some of the ones living in those towns moved even further north
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
4:30 pm
now considered
td
July 12th, 2012
4:30 pm
Checking back in and I see not one lib will answer the question as to what programs to cut or how many children are you willing to add to a classroom so that 650,000 more people do not have to pay for their own insurance?
Hillbilly D
July 12th, 2012
4:34 pm
Uh Oh
I’m farther out. It’s not as far as it used to be though. I still can’t see any of my neighbors in summertime but it’s getting crowded for my tastes. I come from a long line of folks that like to keep to ourselves.
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
4:37 pm
HillBilly D
Thanks. My niece lives outside of Rome. She likes it up there.
My parents used to own a home on Lake Blue Ridge, but sold it because they were spending more time in Central America and are not into renting 2nd homes to supplement the cost.
Chuck Doberman
July 12th, 2012
4:41 pm
LOL “Turn it down, and that money could go toward lower-cost catastrophic coverage for the same uninsured, mostly young, adults”
I guess it maybe COULD go toward lower-cost catastrophic coverage for cotizens… but how many of you believe that if the state were given control of these funds they WOULD be used for such purpose? Anyone?
“Washington takes over Medicaid completely and passes k-12 education totally to the states”
Oh yeah, this is a great idea. Put education in the hands of the GA GOP. Yup, soon you’ll have two options:
1. Take a voucher that’ll cover maybe 50% of tuition at any one of many for-profit businesses operating under the guise of a “school” (cuz public schools will be history… and a new curse-word combination)
OR, if you can’t cover the remainder of the tuition or the for-profit business doesn’t like little Johnny…
2. Home school them yung uns’. Best way – that wey are kidz’ll know that rain is really God’s tears and that dinosaurs are a left-wing conspiracy. They’ll know they’re required to hate “them peeple” and anyone else who ain’t like them. They won’t waste time on stuff like math and science, they can go straight to training for cart gathering at Walmart or a nice career in fast food
Brilliant! Genius! This is the ultimate plan to ensure our kids are dumber than we are (and that’s saying something) and less able to realize they’re being duped by their elected officials (and that’s saying something too!). What an AWESOME idea! Leave our kids’ futures in the hands of Georgia politicians… it just don’t get any better than this
DawgDad
July 12th, 2012
5:01 pm
“Healthcare as a commodity to be bought and sold. Only in America.”
Always has been and always will be. Only difference now is you have politicians and Government bureaucrats beginning to control the market, for their benefit. I was FAR more trusting of Insurance Companies, considering their products were VOLUNTARY purchases.
“the Cherokee took the land I live on from the Creeks (that’s how Blood Mountain gets its name) and neither group was here when DeSoto came through”
Human beings have never been and never will be inherently entitled to real estate they cannot defend. Think about it, it’s a fundamental reason we have societies and government.
md
July 12th, 2012
5:02 pm
“and the first thing they want to do is try to change this place to be like where they came from. So why the hell did they move in the first place?”
Exactly…..if Steve thought so highly of the NE, then why was he here. And if it was due to a job, then evidently the NE wasn’t as wonderful as that job wasn’t up there……….
Phineas
July 12th, 2012
5:02 pm
Oh come on, Kyle. You’re criticizing this because Medicaid because it doesn’t pay out enough to doctors? You say the federal government would send Georgia $35B over the next 10 years for this Medicaid expansion, which you say Georgia should turn down because Medicaid doesn’t reimburse health care providers enough. So would it be ok with you if the federal government sent Georgia $50B instead? How about $75B? Or maybe $100B? Are you really saying this expansion of Medicaid is not big enough?
fair and balanced
July 12th, 2012
5:03 pm
Kyle’s problem with Obamacare ::
“”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”The problem many people on the left have is that they choose to believe anyone who disagrees with their methods disagrees with their goals. This is a particularly bad problem for them when their methods have failed to achieve their goals.”"”"”"”"”"”"
Does that include designing the Affordable Care Act based on the plan of the heritage Foundation and Romneycare??
So I assume you believe Romneycare did not achieve its goals and should be abolished. By the way who the left wing idiot who passed it?
md
July 12th, 2012
5:06 pm
“Healthcare as a commodity to be bought and sold. Only in America.”
Of course it is as it requires the participation of others to deliver it. Unless one wants to go the forced labor camp route…..which is basically what socialized medicine is. One being told how much they can/will charge for their skills……..
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
5:07 pm
F & B
He meaning Romney is a “progressive”. Said so himself when running for Governor
@@
July 12th, 2012
5:08 pm
Well, this topic’s about done, Kyle. You, Tiberius and md have put up some excellent solutions and questions.
I’m gonna venture off to see what Rahm Emanuel’s been up to.
md
July 12th, 2012
5:09 pm
No Phineas, Kyle is referring to what is NOT covered by the feds and will fall on the shoulders of the States……many of which are required to have a balanced budget.
So…..adding thousands to the program will cost millions…..what gets cut to balance the budget?
Any takers…….or are you all just takers?
@@
July 12th, 2012
5:09 pm
Uh Oh:
You probably don’t know this, but I used to be a progressive/leftist/liberal.
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
5:11 pm
Well he said his “views” were not that he was…….. My bad
In 2002, when he was running for governor in Massachusetts, he issued a strong declaration of his basic principles while campaigning in Worcester:
” I think the old standby definitions of who votes for which party have been blown away in this campaign. I think people recognize that I’m not a partisan Republican—that I’m someone who is moderate, and that my views are progressive.”
Will the real Mitt Romney please stand up, please stand up
And quoting Obama’s bs is not a defense of what Romney said………. But in advance, nice side step
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
5:12 pm
@@
I voted for Bush Sr…… twice, but that is beside the point
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
5:13 pm
@@
I have never voted a straight ticket, but that is beside the point as well.
Phineas
July 12th, 2012
5:14 pm
Ok, md, so if the federal government covered the program 100%, and the amount sent to Georgia and the states was higher so that health care providers could be reimbursed more, then you’d be ok with it?
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
5:18 pm
@@
And thanks for displaying your ability to articulate without the “dummycrat” childish bs from earlier
Seriously, thanks.
Phineas
July 12th, 2012
5:18 pm
Conservatives whole argument against Medicaid expansion, or any health care reform to try and provide health care to the poor or those with low incomes who can’t afford private health insurance, is that it simply costs too much. We shouldn’t provide adequate health care or coverage to the poor and those with low incomes because it costs too much, period. That’s the argument.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
July 12th, 2012
5:20 pm
HD
I don’t know what the answer to health care is but what we have now, is a damn mess
Amen to that!
1961_Xer
July 12th, 2012
5:21 pm
A realist on this board wrote: Checking back in and I see not one lib will answer the question as to what programs to cut or how many children are you willing to add to a classroom so that 650,000 more people do not have to pay for their own insurance?
Or how many prisoners are you willing to let out of jail? How many OTHER government services are you willing to forego so that 650,000 more people do not have to pay one iota for their medical care?
The pool of money is fixed. Everything has to be paid from the same pool of money. In the past, Medicaid recipients have screamed murder when faced with paying *anything at all* towards their medical care, and now we want to add 650,000 voices to that chorus?
carlosgvv
July 12th, 2012
5:23 pm
Kyle – 2:51 (sigh)
Arguing befor the Supreme Court is a privledge only a few attorneys ever have. Only the cream of the legal crop ever gets to do this.
So, Kyle, WHY OH WHY do you actually believe any lawyer would do this for NOTHING?
I know you have a document from The State of Georgia stating these services are pro bono. My question is, considering what these attorneys are doing and who(The Supreme Court) they are doing it in front of, why would you even think they would do it for free?
Isn’t it far more likely that, one way or another, they will be handsomely reconpensed?
1961_Xer
July 12th, 2012
5:28 pm
We shouldn’t provide adequate health care or coverage to the poor and those with low incomes because it costs too much, period. That’s the argument.
That is because the “We” isn’t “We” at all. It is, for the most part, the top 50% of wage earners.. the same folks who ALREADY foot the bill for the entire Federal government. There hasn’t been a true “WE” paying for government… whether federal or state, in a very long time.
Phineas
July 12th, 2012
5:29 pm
Well 1961Xer, I don’t necessarily agree with you that the amount the government has to be spend is fixed — taxes could be raised a little, back to the rates they were in the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, or 1990s. But even assuming you’re right, maybe we could do without spending more on defense than the next 42 countries combined. That’s some money that we could probably put to more useful use.
td
July 12th, 2012
5:29 pm
Phineas
July 12th, 2012
5:14 pm
Ok, md, so if the federal government covered the program 100%, and the amount sent to Georgia and the states was higher so that health care providers could be reimbursed more, then you’d be ok with it?
Sorry for jumping in md. The answer is NO. Someone has to pay these HC bills. It is not FREE. Why did I go to school, receive a college degree and work 40 plus hours per week to pay for someones HC so that they can have unlimited text messaging and internet on their phone?
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
5:30 pm
carlos
Great point. Even if not paid directly, the indirect benefits that will probably come to the individual and the firms for touting their appearance before the Supremes will not come with a negative outcome, be rest assured
And good for them
Dusty
July 12th, 2012
5:31 pm
td 4:30
I have found that liberals only answer the questions that reflect well on Democrats. This is, if they can find anything that reflects well on Democrats or their liberal policies.
I don’t spend a whole lot of time here. It aint healthy! I begin to feel that some Americans think this country is a free boarding house hospital established for their convenience. They reject the thought or use of words such as “patriotism, faith, allegiance, self reliance” and angrily question anyone who uses them. Other countries are so much better, is another liberal view..
I don’t feel that way. And I know that everybody doesn’t. But reading here makes me feel that a large majority have formed a definite Moocher class of government dependents.
—————————————————————————-
(Dictionary tip: The meaning of “mooch” is available. Please check before asking.)
eaconnor
July 12th, 2012
5:34 pm
“First and foremost, Medicaid is already a program of limited effectiveness.”
Of course, Medicaid is imperfect; I don’t know anyone who would disagree. But your response is to deny 500,000 without health insurance anything at all? That seems cruel. As far as the blue-skying where you project unsustainable expenditures — why can’t the same legislature that expands a Medicaid program also cut it back when it becomes unaffordable?
td
July 12th, 2012
5:38 pm
Phineas
July 12th, 2012
5:29 pm
Let me frame the question in another way. When your children were young and starting to read did you make them struggle and sound out the words or did you just take the book from them and read it to them because it was to hard on them? If you know a person is a sober alcoholic and they come to a party you are hosting, do you throw them a beer as soon as they walk in the door?
If we a society keep giving the poor everything they need in life then we are doing nothing more the enabling them to continue in behavior that is detrimental to not only their well being but also to the countries well being. When are people going to be held accountable for their actions?
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
5:38 pm
Dusty
Well since I own my own consulting business as well as several rental properties and retired from a Fortune 500 company based here in Atlanta, I am glad your broad brush and naive take on people who do not fit your ideology do not encompass me.
But do carry on with the paint strokes. Your generalities are very amusing
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
July 12th, 2012
5:40 pm
Hillybilly D
Had much the same problem with myopia, half blind, and they told me Lasix would only make the glasses thinner. At 62, not satisfied with my optomotrist and saw Opthamologist about diminishing vision. He said I had cataract in both eyes and although it was just beginning, insurance would pay for surgery. Short story, I paid extra for a corrective lens, think it was $800 bucks more than the medicare lens, now seeing 20/20 for the first time in my life. Something to keep in back of your mind.
Phineas
July 12th, 2012
5:40 pm
Ok td, so if someone has a low income, low enough that they can’t afford private health insurance, but too high to qualify for Medicaid, and they have a cell phone that they text on, and then they have a heart attack and need heart by-pass surgery to survive, what should we do? Just say sorry, you’re too poor to get heart by-pass surgery? Or you have a cell phone, so you don’t get heart by-pass surgery? Do you think if they didn’t have a cell phone then they could afford private health insurance or to pay for heart by-pass surgery?
md
July 12th, 2012
5:41 pm
“Ok, md, so if the federal government covered the program 100%, and the amount sent to Georgia and the states was higher so that health care providers could be reimbursed more, then you’d be ok with it?”
Except the aca will never cover it 100%. What it covers is 100% of service costs dropping to 90% of service costs, and 0% of any additional costs for administrative costs and forever maintenance.
The additional administrative costs alone will be in the millions for many states. Unless one believes or wants the system to try to handle the additional workload with the status quo numbers.
Dusty
July 12th, 2012
5:44 pm
easconnor,
The Medicaid program is already unafforable. It is already stretched to its financial limits in Georgia with no new patients. What is more cruel? To bankrupt a state or provide cheap heathcare for a limited number of people? And in case you haven’t notice, the Feds have us up to our necks in debt so don’t depend on them. . Please don’t tell me you did not know that.
Phineas
July 12th, 2012
5:44 pm
Yeah td, I worked hard in school and in life and my work and teach my kids to do so also. But a lot of people are doing that these days, and still can’t afford health insurance, or to pay out of pocket if something catastrophic health-wise happens. What do we do then? I think the whole idea of Obamacare is to partially subsidize the health insurance for people who can’t fully afford it. Isn’t that ok?
Liz
July 12th, 2012
5:46 pm
Carlosgvv,
A well written open records request would show how much paid work that particular lawyer or law firm got over the last several years. In relation to the total spent on outside counsel. You could compare billable rates. Law firms work very hard over years to draw favor with elected officials. They buy “tables” at fund raisers, throw parties to make impressive block campaign contributions, give away sports tickets…, and donate their time “pro-bono”.
td
July 12th, 2012
5:46 pm
Phineas
July 12th, 2012
5:29 pm
Just a little more:
Life is hard and we have to make decisions in life. We choose to go to school. We choose to study in college instead of going to the party and we choose to stay late at work to get the assignment completed to impress the boss. We sacrifice that nice car and buy the used car because we want to pay our house off faster or to put some money in a 401k account for our retirement.
Where are the sacrifices the poor make in this country? Why did they not forgo the party in school? Why did they think they needed to stand up to the boss instead of keeping their head down and working harder? When are the poor going to be held accountable?
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
5:48 pm
Liz @ 5:46
exactly
Dusty
July 12th, 2012
5:50 pm
Rafe,
I’m glad you finally went to an MD. An optomotrist is not an MD as you probably know. Sometimes it pays to see the best. We won’t have much of the “best” should ObamaCare really come to pass.
Phineas
July 12th, 2012
5:51 pm
Also td, I assume that beacuse you want people to be held accountable for their actions, that you are against medical malpractice tort reform. I mean, if people should be responsible for their actions, then health care providers should be responsible for their mistakes, right?
md
July 12th, 2012
5:52 pm
“We shouldn’t provide adequate health care or coverage to the poor and those with low incomes because it costs too much, period. ”
For starters, those that know of me know that I operate off the fact that we choose everything we do (it’s a fact, no if’s and’s or but’s).
From that point of reference, I believe we have an obligation to help any and all individuals that are incapable of helping themselves…….
Which leaves those that for the most part choose not to help themselves and would prefer others to do it for them. And for these, I’m not heartless, but tough love should apply. It’s the way I was raised and the way I raised my own, so I see no problem appying it to those I don’t know.
We as a society provide everybody the opportunity to take an easier road in life by providing a free education……that is the starting point for any and all assistance, as knowledge is power and can never be taken away. Any future assistance should be tied back to program number 1 and go from there………all help for these individuals should come with conditions………
td
July 12th, 2012
5:53 pm
Phineas
July 12th, 2012
5:40 pm
Ok td, so if someone has a low income, low enough that they can’t afford private health insurance, but too high to qualify for Medicaid, and they have a cell phone that they text on, and then they have a heart attack and need heart by-pass surgery to survive, what should we do?
Why did that person make the sacrifice of the loaded cell phone ($100 to $200 per month) to purchase insurance? I have compassion for the poor that are truly disabled and can not work or will be working for $7.25 their entire life but I worked in DFCS for a few years after college (work experience) and saw way to many people not doing anything but gaming the system and getting bailed out for making poor decisions in their lives. I have very little compassion for these (and I can tell you it is about 70% of welfare rolls) “poor people”.
Skip
July 12th, 2012
5:54 pm
Could we make the poor, those lazy &%$# that lost jobs to outsourcing sell a couple internal organs? That could pay for some care.Heaven knows we can’t pass on a chance for a war.
td
July 12th, 2012
5:56 pm
Phineas
July 12th, 2012
5:51 pm
Also td, I assume that beacuse you want people to be held accountable for their actions, that you are against medical malpractice tort reform. I mean, if people should be responsible for their actions, then health care providers should be responsible for their mistakes, right?
If you want to go to a loser pays system then I would accept your statement.
Phineas
July 12th, 2012
5:56 pm
So td, you think everyone who is poor is poor because they party too much? Hmmm. I actually did pretty good in school and work hard and make sacrifices and try to make the right choices, and it’s pretty hard for me to afford private health insurance for me and my family — especially when the cost of health insurance goes up about 20% per on average as it basically has since I can remember. A LOT of good peopla can’t afford private health insurance, td.
md
July 12th, 2012
6:01 pm
And just so folks know, I don’t limit my choices meme to only those on one end of the spectrum……..I also have a beef with rich folks that have ever filed for bankruptcy and have bounced back and amassed some wealth. My tough love also applies to them. They should have to make those they screwed over whole again once they have returned to prosperity………
Same with bad credit card debt…….bad housing debt…….etc. Shafting others for ones actions should not be the American way……..
Dusty
July 12th, 2012
6:05 pm
Phineas,
If you live in Atlanta, do you not know that major surgeries are performed every day at Grady Hospital which is a hospital designed for poor people? Do you know that most hospitals have budget allowances built in their budgets for patients who cannot or will not pay for services rendered? That most counties have health clinics to help those who cannot pay? That there are agencies and people who can help the poor find care?
Do you actually know someone who is dying without healthcare because no one will help them? I am sure there are people suffering who could have better care, but to say there is no care is wrong.
How Inciteful Is That!
July 12th, 2012
6:06 pm
I believe it was the AJC that ran an article that stated that Georgia hospitals lost 1.5 billion last year on uninsured patients.
td
July 12th, 2012
6:09 pm
Phineas
July 12th, 2012
5:56 pm
So do you have a cell phone with unlimited text and internet access? We know you have internet access or you would not be on this blog? How often do you trade cars? How much of your monthly household income goes to your home? Do you have cable TV and if so is just the very basic package or a bigger package?
Why should taxpayers money (another citizens money) go to pay for your insurance when you have not made all the sacrifices yourself?
Dusty
July 12th, 2012
6:09 pm
Skip
“Pass for a war!” Pure propaganda. If you don’t want to fight terrorism, just say so and wave a white flag.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward--Again)
July 12th, 2012
6:13 pm
Phineas: Conservatives whole argument against Medicaid expansion blah blah blah…
————————-
Liberals whole argument for Medicaid expansion is that there is no limit on the amount of other folks property that can be taken by the government to buy votes.
How much did you donate to charities that provide health care to the less fortunate last year?
That’s what I thought.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward--Again)
July 12th, 2012
6:14 pm
If libtards walked their talk, there would be no need for Medicaid, now would there?
Libtards: Do-nothing, greedy hypocrites.
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
6:15 pm
“Libtards: Do-nothing, greedy hypocrites.”
LIAR
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
6:17 pm
“Libtards: Do-nothing, greedy hypocrites.”
Ignorant generality to pump up the self esteem of the blogger.
link?
md
July 12th, 2012
6:17 pm
“If you want to go to a loser pays system then I would accept your statement.”
Stipulating that 50% comes out of the attorney’s pocket……..that should cut down immensely on the ambulance chasers out there……..
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
6:19 pm
Barry
You going to post unfounded BS as you usually do, I will call BS.
Simple as that
You want to engage in civil discourse then let’s do so
md
July 12th, 2012
6:20 pm
“I actually did pretty good in school and work hard and make sacrifices and try to make the right choices, and it’s pretty hard for me to afford private health insurance for me and my family — especially when the cost of health insurance goes up about 20% per on average as it basically has since I can remember.”
Which needs to be addressed…….those against this montrosity of a bill are not saying do nothing, but 1200 pages to reinvent the wheel and allow uncle sugar to take over was not needed.
To solve your problem (I had it too), all that needed to be done was to allow the same pools used by employers. Self-employed and unemployed should be allowed to form a pool of their own to reduce the cost on all.
Dusty
July 12th, 2012
6:23 pm
How inciteful…….
Yep, hospitals lost money but the uninsured got care. Right? Wonder how that happened?
Everybody, including hospitals and doctors, are going to lose money with Obamacare whether you are sick or not. Benevolence will be gone. The government is going to pay for everythng with your money and make “best” decisions for you.
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
6:25 pm
Does anyone have any statistics on how Romneycare depleted services in MASS?
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward--Again)
July 12th, 2012
6:29 pm
How much did you donate, Uh Oh?
@@
July 12th, 2012
6:32 pm
While “loser pays” might discourage some of the more frivolous lawsuits, losers don’t always have the money to pay or the desire to pay.
I’ve often wondered about legal insurance like what they have in Europe.
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
6:32 pm
Some have argued that adding people to rolls and the additional administrative strain would send doctors packing from the medical industry. Doctors leave their practice all the time for various reasons, including administrative burden.
People were added to the roles in Mass, yet they still have the best doctor / patient ratio in the US. I’m sure there are problems and headaches but no mass exodus.
It is claimed by some that not as many people will be wanting to go to medical school. Yet across this great nation, even in GA, there has been an increase in applicants for medical schools.
There will be headaches and it will not even be close to perfect, however this is the same as the NRA and some Republicans saying Obama was going to take your guns last election. Hype and rhetoric to scare the base.
TGT
July 12th, 2012
6:33 pm
From that point of reference, I believe we have an obligation to help any and all individuals that are incapable of helping themselves…….
Yes, a moral nation does, but govt. should not be the vehicle for such aid. (I haven’t read all your posts md, but it seems that you may tend to agree. Nevertheless…)
As I have done before, I call upon the ghost of Grover Cleveland:
While taking a stand against government aid involving a very deserving orphanage in New York City during a severe economic crisis, Cleveland, a Democrat, said, “I will not be a party to stealing money from one group of citizens to give to another group of citizens. No matter what the need or apparent justification, once the coffers of the federal government are opened to the public, there will be no shutting them again…It is the responsibility of citizens to support their government. It is not the responsibility of government to support its citizens.”
In 1887, after vetoing a bill that appropriated $10,000 to buy grain for several drought-stricken Texas counties, Cleveland stated, “Federal aid in such cases encourages the expectation of paternal care on the part of the government and weakens the sturdiness of our national character, while it prevents the indulgence among our people of that kindly sentiment and conduct which strengthens the bonds of a common brotherhood.”
If only today’s Democrat Party were in the same solar system with Cleveland. Ben Franklin said, “When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.” Obamacare is certainly another step in that direction.
Hillbilly D
July 12th, 2012
6:33 pm
If you want to go to a loser pays system then I would accept your statement.
Bad idea, in my opinion. Under that scenario, a poor person can never sue a rich person, even if he has a very valid case, because he can’t afford to lose. The legal system is already skewed enough towards those with money, without doing that. As it is now, if a poor or middle class person goes up against a rich person or company, all the person/company with money has to do is drag it out and delay until they bleed the other side dry.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
July 12th, 2012
6:34 pm
Dusty, yes finally wised up that optomotrist was over his head. Glad I don’t live in Canada, it takes 18 weeks there, to be able to see a specialist. Took me one day, after the call!
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward--Again)
July 12th, 2012
6:34 pm
Uh Oh: You want to engage in civil discourse then let’s do so
————————–
I’m not here for discourse. I am here to educate and to irritate. I am the grain of sand that irritates the bottom feeding, crusty, blind libtards into thinking, and in rare cases inducing them to produce their own pearl of wisdom.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward--Again)
July 12th, 2012
6:37 pm
@@: While “loser pays” might discourage some of the more frivolous lawsuits, losers don’t always have the money to pay.
———————
Their lawyers do. Put up or shut up, parasite lawyers.
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
6:38 pm
Barry
Post unsubstantiated BS and I will call you on your BS
If you can’t engage in civil discourse as Kyle laid out for the bloggers, that is on you and him, however I will be calling out for your weak talking points.
Next.
Dusty
July 12th, 2012
6:39 pm
Uh OH, 5:38
Well, thank you, Uh Oh.. So glad you are enjoying my “generalities”. Wish I could say the same for yours.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
July 12th, 2012
6:39 pm
UH OH
As far as MA goes, two things, the prices of health insurance in MA lead the nation.
Also, the MA health care law was designed to provide care for those not currently insured, which was about 8%. Unlike Obamacare, they did not rewrite health insurance laws for those, who were already covered. They left folks, who had coverage, undamaged!
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
6:41 pm
Dusty
You can’t because I do not make blanket statement in terms of politics or the individuals discussing them. I may go aftter the policy or politician but it is not with con this, lib that, etc.
That is for the shallow minded
But nice try and good work on the “painting”……..
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward--Again)
July 12th, 2012
6:42 pm
Uh Oh donated zip to make her dream of health care for all a reality.
Hillbilly D
July 12th, 2012
6:43 pm
In North Georgia, the only two sectors of the economy that are expanding are the College and University system and healthcare. If hospitals lose money, why are they lining up to build knew ones? Either it doesn’t make sense or they’re not losing what they claim they are. i hardly ever see a doctor move into a smaller office, either. They just keep getting bigger and bigger. Somebody must be making some money, somewhere.
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
6:43 pm
Rafe
Great points. However people were added to the rolls. Maybe not you but many on the right have contended that with all those being added, services would suffer.
I ask again, are there stats that say with added folks have services suffered.
Maybe they have, I haven’t seen the information
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
July 12th, 2012
6:44 pm
Hillbilly
Disagree with you on loser pays. If a poor person has a good case and stands to win, a ambulance chasing lawyer is going to weigh the odds and if he thinks he can make money, he is going to gamble that he is going to get his 40%. Bad case, you are right, no lawyer takes it, but we do not need anymore bad cases being tried.
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
6:45 pm
Dusty
Notice I usually use many, most, several, few………… While that is not an exact number it surely allows anyone with common sense to see that I am not looking to “paint” every individual
Everyone is not the same, politically or otherwise, an attempt to paint as such is either ignorant, naive or just childish.
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
6:46 pm
manana
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward--Again)
July 12th, 2012
6:47 pm
It’s just too easy…when you try.
——————-
Massachusetts Medical Society Releases 2011 Study of Patient Access to Health Care
Longer patient wait times, continued difficult access to primary care physicians,and gaps in physician acceptance of government coverage
http://www.massmed.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=MMS_News_Releases&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&CONTENTID=54338
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
July 12th, 2012
6:48 pm
UH OH,
Doctors leave because they are not getting paid as much as they think they are worth and they can earn more in other states or do not want to work for that little money. Nothing in MA insurance reform effects the rate of pay. Everyone has private insurance, even the previously uninsured.
Doctor pay is usually based on what the insurance companies or medicare or medicaid will pay. Nothing about that changed in MA, but Obamacare changes everything about how they are paid.
Apples and Oranges, again.
Uh Oh
July 12th, 2012
6:48 pm
Barry
Thanks for the info and exchange. I will certainly check it out
later
Hillbilly D
July 12th, 2012
6:49 pm
Rafe
I think there is an easier way to solve the problem. I’m no lawyer but seems to me that judges could throw out more of the “frivolous” cases, early on and cut down on some of this. Of course, judges are lawyers and they’ve all got their finger in the same pie.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
July 12th, 2012
6:52 pm
I think what Lil Barry’s research shows is that you can’t add all these new patients and not add doctors. Preview of what we will be facing under Obamacare.
@@
July 12th, 2012
6:56 pm
Their lawyers do. Put up or shut up, parasite lawyers.
Interesting. So the lawyers would determine what is and is not winnable. They’d probably take their previous losses out of the next victim’s win. As long as the victim understands, I’m good with that.
I’m not of a litigious nature.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
July 12th, 2012
6:56 pm
HD
Judges are lawyers and like to help other lawyers make money as you said. This goes with something else you said about hospitals and doctors expanding and growing. I think they are in cahoots with the insurance companies. They work out procedure payments, neither have an obligation to control costs, because the insurance companies just raise premium rates and maybe….get some kickback from the hospitals (the ones they don’t own anyway). The people paying the premiums are defenseless.
@@
July 12th, 2012
6:58 pm
At 6:59 I’m gonna call someone a horrible name.
Where’s Getalife?
(ISH)
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward--Again)
July 12th, 2012
6:59 pm
You also can’t pay for your own health insurance, pay for the new mandates placed on your insurance company, pay for the health insurance that is now an entitlement, pay for expanded Medicaid, pay higher taxes for pharmaceuticals, pay higher taxes for medical devices….and “bend the cost curve down”.
You would have to be an economic retard to believe that. Or an Obozo receptacle.
md
July 12th, 2012
7:08 pm
Apparently, MA hc is working so good the legislature there is working on applying price caps on the system…….which means it’s out of control and the gov’t is going into dictate mode……..
md
July 12th, 2012
7:16 pm
Moderation time?
@@
July 12th, 2012
7:48 pm
?
@@
July 12th, 2012
7:48 pm
Someone left the lights on.
Fred ™
July 12th, 2012
7:51 pm
of course it’s moderation time. You right wingers can’t abide free speech.
@@
July 12th, 2012
7:54 pm
Fred:
It may be a test. ‘Ya wanna talk recipes?
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
July 12th, 2012
7:54 pm
Now, now ladies, play nice.
Just The Facts
July 12th, 2012
7:57 pm
“of course it’s moderation time. You right wingers can’t abide free speech.”
Oh sure, as if you liberal demwits just LOVE the Right having the freedoms of expressing our views and voices, right? {eye roll}
Anyway, the liberal children in the Obamazombie camp are trying to pin Romney on lies and his representation of Bain Capital. These clowns just can’t run on their own failed record, can they? Here you go Obamazombies, read it and weep…
“Fortune obtained the offering documents for a Bain Capital Fund circulating in June 2000, as well as a fund in 2001. None of the documents show that Romney was listed as being among the “key investment professionals.” As Fortune put it, “the contemporaneous Bain documents show that Romney was indeed telling the truth about no longer having operational input at Bain — which, one should note, is different from no longer having legal or financial ties to the firm.”
@@
July 12th, 2012
7:57 pm
Now, now ladies, play nice.
Always, I Report…
.
.
.
.
.
.
Andy
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
July 12th, 2012
7:57 pm
I just dropped by to tell Wingnut to batten down the hatches, cinch her up and hunker down, if Condi Rice gets the nod for VP the liberals will literally freak the ^%$* out. Turn loose the lynch mobs. Grind their teeth incessantly. Rend their clothing.
Call her every name in the book.
eck
td
July 12th, 2012
7:59 pm
Still no answer for the people in favor of expanding Medicaid? What are you willing to cut to give free insurance to 650,000 more in Georgia?
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
July 12th, 2012
7:59 pm
kookman’s hair will stand on end. He’ll require immediate medical assistance.
carlosgvv
July 12th, 2012
8:01 pm
Kyle, how’s your new baby doing?
Is this your first?
@@
July 12th, 2012
8:02 pm
carlosgvv:
It’s his second.
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
July 12th, 2012
8:03 pm
Good God, this woman has more brains than the whole entire dummycrat collectively put together and they’ll be calling her “stupid.”
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
July 12th, 2012
8:04 pm
eh, dummycrat party
Fred ™
July 12th, 2012
8:06 pm
@@
July 12th, 2012
7:54 pm
Fred:
It may be a test. ‘Ya wanna talk recipes?
++++++++++++++++++
I’d love to. How have you been BTW? Did you ever go to USinUK’s recipe site? Very interesting. She has some good stuff there.
@@
July 12th, 2012
8:11 pm
Fred:
I was kidding about the recipes. It’s the last thing I wanna talk about. I’ve offered up one, maybe two…but that was years ago. We’ve got more important things on our plates right now.
AmVet
July 12th, 2012
8:15 pm
Condoleezza Rice as Mitt’s running mate???
Holy moly!
At that point, we might as well just rename him George Willard Bush.
How many Bushies does he already have on his staff? (ANY is too many.)
Gawd knows, this country is NOT ready for MORE of that awful administration.
She would sink Mitt’s already slim chances quicker than Sarah did the other RINOs…
Fred ™
July 12th, 2012
8:17 pm
Really @@? Like what? What’s more important? The Republicans complete lack of effort to compromise on ANYTHING? Their whole Baptist idea of do it my way or you are going to hell?
Seriously, I’m here on a Republican blog. You sell fear. I’m not afraid. What have you to offer me OTHER than a good Gazpacho recipe? Because I sure as hell ain’t scared of everything like you cowards are.
@@
July 12th, 2012
8:22 pm
Fred:
Like what? Howz’bout a stagnant economy? Millions of people on unemployment?
You’re a weird little fella, Fred.
Fred ™
July 12th, 2012
8:29 pm
@@: How’s about milions of jobs offshored to China where their slave labor and forced child labor are rampant while American companies that ship those jobs to the slave labor make record profit while slashing american jobs? What’s your point?
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
July 12th, 2012
8:30 pm
Ladies!
Hillbilly D
July 12th, 2012
8:30 pm
The sidewalks ain’t rolled up yet?
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
July 12th, 2012
8:37 pm
D- It’s the Condi Rice for VP Special Extended Blog Night and Festivities and already the girls are scratching at each others eyes.
You can’t take them any where.
@@
July 12th, 2012
8:38 pm
Calm down, Fred.
Last I checked Ralph Lauren was an Obama supporter.
They are the pride of America — Team U.S.A. — and for the opening ceremonies of the Summer Olympics in London, they’ll be proudly wearing red, white and blue, from beret to blazer.
The classic American style — shown in an image above — was crafted by designer Ralph Lauren. But just how American is it?
When ABC News looked at the labels, it found “made in China.”
I’m out.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
July 12th, 2012
8:43 pm
Fred
You do know that most of the jobs, few to say the least, that Oblamer’s Green Energy initiative created, were created in China. Taxpayer money subsidizing jobs in China, in my mind, is worse than US Corporations off shoring jobs, in an effort to make money. I know I didn’t send in my tax dollars to fund China or Pakistan either BTW.
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
July 12th, 2012
8:44 pm
Gonna be kinda hard to call Romney a racist now, ain’t libbies?
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
July 12th, 2012
8:47 pm
I report
They will find a way!
AmVet
July 12th, 2012
8:54 pm
Romney is a quasi-liberal, effete, northeastern RINO who championed socialized medicine and the individual mandate.
From what I have read of his life, he’s no racist. But then he is nothing close to demonstrating the courage over racial matters that his dad did either.
And…
Romney drew boos from the NAACP audience on Wednesday for blasting Obama’s healthcare overhaul and his leadership on the economy. Romney promised he could improve life for blacks by turning around the economy and cutting unemployment – at 14.4 percent for blacks compared to the national average of 8.2 percent.
But Biden said Obama had made the tough decisions that pulled the economy out of recession with his economic stimulus plan and auto industry bailout.
I’m guessing they don’t believe his promises!
No Artificial Flavors
July 12th, 2012
8:54 pm
Nice Analysis Kyle. Well done on including the bit about more doctors opting out. Liberals forget that part.
I also like how when Medicaid enters the discussion suddenly everyone is poor like Ayn Rant’s 30% of Georgians figure. Really, about one in three Georgians are poor? What does poor even mean anymore then?
Kyle Wingfield
July 12th, 2012
9:07 pm
I just got home from the AJC’s forum on the T-SPLOST (which went very well, btw) and am only now getting to put the comments thread in moderation. But in case anyone forgot I’m still doing this for the foreseeable future, here’s your reminder that comments will go through moderation from now until ~7 a.m.
Dusty
July 12th, 2012
9:14 pm
I report,
Is that true about Condi Rice or just someone’s passing fancy? Romney and Condi in Washington! Imagine ! Two smart, ethical, experienced people at the top of the line.
After the past three + years, we surely could use some good news!
We’d get that good Bush feeling of honest and integrity again.
Liz
July 12th, 2012
9:36 pm
What can be cut to saves lives in Georgia. Hum… how about all those special sales tax exemptions to start. For 50K each, you could hire some top gun young CPAs, to go after all those scofflaws. We have loads of them, and lots of tax laws to be enforced. It is so bad, federal and state revenue employees feel duplicitous, as they are told with a wink and nod which of those not to go after.
Lynnie Gal
July 12th, 2012
9:51 pm
First of all, Medicaid for a higher number of the working poor–those who work (sometimes two) jobs but are not offered an insurance plan by the employer(s)–should be implemented. It’s a black-hearted person who does not want people to have health care, and I’m ashamed of the way our governor and the legislature is acting toward it’s own people. This lack of empathy is almost sociopathic. Next, no one should be excluded from being able to obtain health insurance because of a pre-exiting condition. AND, NO ONE should lose their house–their primary residence–because they were sick and either had no insurance or couldn’t obtain it or couldn’t afford it. It should be ILLEGAL to take away a person’s home for a hospital bill, so they can be dumped on the street. The problem with our health care system isn’t because it’s socialist. The problem is, because the system is capitalist, with an emphasis on money and profit.
ld
July 12th, 2012
10:29 pm
States would be better served focusing most of the money spent on “free” or “sliding fee” care on children provided via existing county health departments and its referrals; HOWEVER, in order for that to work, all doctors in the state must have a participation obligation linked to license to practice; AND, it would serve the state’s interest to encourage younger doctors to participate via a “reward” to those medical professionals that have student loan debt outstanding as a result of having attended a STATE school w/some degree of debt forgiveness, not unlike some teachers are able to get debt forgiveness by teaching in schools that find it difficult to recruit good teachers.
md
July 12th, 2012
10:45 pm
Good ole Fred….never met an insult he could walk away from. But I guess then he wouldn’t be Fred.
As for your rant on jobs Fred….the American consumer is complicit in the outsourcing as they are the ones buying all that crap (what we buy is a choice)…..so rant at them when you get a chance too….OK?
Colin Micheals
July 13th, 2012
1:21 am
For those of you against Medicare. What do you propose happen to the disabled, whether they are born that way, or become disabled later in life, as could happen to you or your loved one? Should they be left in the street to die? What is your plan? Let’s say you get in a car accident and become quadriplegic and your whole family loses health insurance because you can no longer work? And you have a child that needs medication to live and without insurance you can no longer afford it? What do you think of Obamacare now? The ignorance of some people makes me sick.
Ragbatz
July 13th, 2012
1:50 am
Wingfield’s analysis reminds me of the teenager who kills his parents and then begs the court to show mercy because he is an orphan. According to Kyle, huge problems would result from accepting federal funds to expand Medicaid. There are two roots to this potential calamity: the fact that reimbursement rates for Mediicaud are low and the fact that federal government might reduce the federal share of Medicaid.
He’s half-right on both counts. Both of these two factors could complicate a Medicaid expansion in Georgia. But for each factor, there’s something important he’s leaving out.
Medicaid reimbursement levels in Georgia are determined by Georgia lawmakers. They could, and certainly would, be a lot higher if the members of the Georgia wing of Wingfield’s own political tribe allowed them to be.
On the other hand, federal lawmakers will determine the federal percentage of Medicaid costs. And that share will only be reduced if the members of the national wing of Wingfield’s own political tribe allowed that to happen.
Seriously, does anyone think that It’s Georgia Democrats who keep Medicaid provider payments in Georgia low? Or, nationally, that anyone other than Republicans is likely to call for reducing Medicaid spending?
So, Kyle Wingfield, I ask you: do you favor increasing Medicaid provider payments in Georgia? Do you favor maintaining the federal Medicaid percentage and spending levels found in current law? Or will you and your GOP tribe go on, like the orphan whose killed his parents, complaining about a horrible situation caused by your own conduct.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
July 13th, 2012
7:33 am
Lynne Gal: It’s a black-hearted person who does not want people to have health care
———-
How much did you donate to charity last year to make that a reality?
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
July 13th, 2012
7:36 am
Seriously, does anyone think that It’s Georgia Democrats who keep Medicaid provider payments in Georgia low?
———
Yes. If we had fewer Democrats on the dole, Medicaid reimbursements could be increased.
How Inciteful Is That!
July 13th, 2012
7:40 am
We donate time and money and material goods to charity every year. What does that have to do with ensuring every person gets needed healthcare without imposing strictly on the hospitals to provide said service in the emergency rooms. How many millions of uninsured in need of healthcare does Lil Barry take care of each year with his tax deductible charitable giving.
How Inciteful Is That!
July 13th, 2012
7:41 am
Yes. If we had fewer Republicans on the dole, Medicaid reimbursements could be increased
Stan
July 13th, 2012
7:43 am
Medical care is not a luxury. It’s one of the necessities of life. When I see articles like this one and when I read over some of the cruel comments, I wonder why so many of us feel so little concern for the poor. And I wonder why God has created people without a soul.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
July 13th, 2012
7:46 am
If you were walking your talk, there would be no need for Medicaid, because your charitable contributions would cover the cost. The existence of Medicaid in itself demonstrates that Democrats are greedy, do-nothing hypocrites.
How Inciteful Is That!
July 13th, 2012
8:20 am
If you were walking your talk, there would be no need for Medicaid, because your charitable contributions would cover the cost. The existence of Medicaid in itself demonstrates that Republicans are greedy, do-nothing hypocrites.
How Inciteful Is That!
July 13th, 2012
8:21 am
Lots of things are “necessities of life”. That’s why responsible Americans work for a living, and why loser parasites vote Republican.
md
July 13th, 2012
8:37 am
“Medicaid reimbursement levels in Georgia are determined by Georgia lawmakers. They could, and certainly would, be a lot higher if the members of the Georgia wing of Wingfield’s own political tribe allowed them to be. ”
And for the umpteenth time, what do you plan to cut to compensate for that rise?
Seems some here are clueless as to how a balanced budget state must operate…….but that doesn’t surprise me considering the entire calamity of 2008 was the result of folks taking on more and more debt……..
A health conscious observer
July 13th, 2012
9:00 am
The liberals responding here have lost site of the big picture. It is not about cruelty. It is about fiscal responsibility and more importantly having the right incentives in this country, including the right incentives in healthcare. That is what made this country great at the start and we are losing that edge and going into ever greater debt. The underlying opposition to Obamacare is not about protecting big business or the wealthy. The opposition is to the fact that if you give more healthcare away – or require hospital ER’s to provide free care to some while charging others more to cover the cost – there is less incentive for individuals to work hard, work smart, take care of themselves and take risks to achieve a better financial future and afford the care they want. Giving away even more expensive healthcare (not to mention the education, retirement, food stamps and other social services benefits that we already offer those in need) by taking from one echelon of society and giving to the other echelon is not the government our country’s successful founders envisioned and it does not create the right incentives and is breaking the country. Enough is enough. People need to go after what they want in life and treat one another with respect and let’s all get Washington to protect our citizens by ensuring there is a more level playing ground for the “small guy” who really wants to work hard and compete with the bigger guy and powerful corporations. Let’s not just give away more benefits away. The federal government’s role is to protect, not provide. Health is something to be maintained by individuals who take preventative measures (that are not costly!!) and health care services are a privilege to be earned not en entitlement to be expected.
Ragbatz
July 13th, 2012
11:59 am
“And for the umpteenth time, what do you plan to cut to compensate for that rise?”
First, as regards argument, my point was simply that his argument is like the plea for mercy by the parenticidal orphan. What Wingfield calls flaws in Democratic policy are policies he and his ilk have put in place.
Second, I’ll admit that something must be cut to improve Medicaid provider. How about after-tax incomes of Georgia citizens who earn incomes over, say, $250,001 dollars? So, Health conscious observer, paying for Medicaid improvements by revenue increases is just as fiscally responsible as paying by offsets.
As for health concious observer’s argument about a society with the right incentives, I simply note that only a single political party among the advanced nations of the world supports the policy that health care need not be available to all without regard to ability to pay. In fact, if a conservative party in any other country put in place a plan as conservative as Obamacare, with its heavy reliance on private insurance markets, that party would be out of office in a matter of weeks and remain out of power for two decades. With the exception of one country, the civilized world considers health care a right, not a privilege.
Ragbatz
July 13th, 2012
12:35 pm
Wingfield is incorrect about free pro bono legal services in the healthcare litigation. One Georgia attorney , a Mercer law school professor, did donate his time. Georgia, however, paid a five-figure share for the services of the most expensive attorney working the case, Paul Clement. Clement was counsel of record and presented the oral argument at SCOTUS.
Since Wingfield goes sarcastic on this very point, asking, “You don’t believe a word I say, do you?”, I would say his credibility is truly in issue. He owes us a phone call to the AG, followed by a retraction.
Ragbatz
July 13th, 2012
12:57 pm
Little Barry Bailout, I am not the guy who raised or pushed the charitable donation issue, so I wonder why you are directing at me that sarcastic question and direct accusation of greed.
And, for the record, I HAVE walked my talk of health care for all for decades.
Kyle Wingfield
July 13th, 2012
1:44 pm
The disclosure forms still do not show any payments to Paul Clement, but Ragbatz is correct: Georgia’s share of Clement’s fee for this case will be $10,000. That’s the only fee related to the case for Georgia. So, it is not zero, but nor is it “untold millions.”
Given that the ruling gives Georgia the option of forgoing hundreds of millions of dollars a year in additional Medicaid costs, I’d say it was a good investment.
Ragbatz
July 13th, 2012
1:47 pm
One more thing about the claim that Georgia was represented “pro bono” in the ACA litigation. “Pro bono” normally conjures up he idea of an unpai, public-spirited attorney donating his services for the poor or for a public entity. What it certainly does not conjure up is a sovereign State government serving as a plaintiff and riding piggy-back in a litigation funded almost entirely by a political action group with a strong financial interest in the result. The ACA litigation in which Georgia was a plaintiff was primarily funded and carried out by the NFIB.
Do you think Kyle Wingfield might have “concerns” if a Democratic governor allowed controversial and politically-charged litigation in Georgia’s name to funded and carried out by the UAW, so that she could have the political cover of saying that the litigation cost Georgia nothing? Do you think the Pope might be Catholic?
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
July 13th, 2012
2:03 pm
Do you think Kyle Wingfield might have “concerns” if a Democratic governor allowed blah blah…
——–
When a Democrat wins a statewide race, much less governor, we’ll let you know.
Ragbatz
July 13th, 2012
2:03 pm
Kyle says the result of the litigation was a good deal for Georgia. It paid only $10,000 in cash, but mostly it got that supposedly good deal by riding piggy-back on the NFIB, a political action group that did indeed spend millions in the litigation. A reasonable person might wonder whether the public-spirited NFIB might have bought itself some influence with its generous, “pro bono” program.
Ragbatz
July 13th, 2012
2:13 pm
Lill. Barr, why duck this issue? Do you favor letting Georgia governors or of any party lend the State’s name and authority to controversial, politically-charged litigation funded and carried out by such self-interested entities like the NFIB or the UAW?
Kyle Wingfield
July 13th, 2012
2:24 pm
Ragbatz @ 2:03: If you think the NFIB had to do that in order to have some pull under the Gold Dome, you don’t really know how things work around here.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
July 13th, 2012
2:28 pm
I’m all for anti-American legislation such as Obozocare being attacked by any means necessary.
Kyle Wingfield
July 13th, 2012
2:32 pm
Lil’ Barry @ 7:49 (now unpublished): I’m inclined to let things like “libtard” and “Repugs” stand, but lines such as “loser parasites vote Democrat” is unnecessary.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
July 13th, 2012
2:48 pm
Anyone who has been paying attention for the last four years would certainly agree with your assessment, Kyle.
Ragbatz
July 13th, 2012
3:10 pm
Kyle, I think “pull” comes in different flavors. Flavors like ” more”, “less”, and ” what have you done for me lately”. But, okay, call me clueless if you must.
You, too, are invited to engage, today, on the issue of whether Georgia governors or AGs should be allowed to lend the prestige of the State to controversial, politically charged litigation funded and implemented by private, self- interested entities like the NFIB or UAW. If you remain silent about this procedure, your silence may be used against you should you choose to holler when a Democratic official similarly teams up with the UAW.
Kyle Wingfield
July 13th, 2012
3:13 pm
Ragbatz: As I wrote in the OP, Georgia had a legitimate interest in suing over the Medicaid expansion. Beyond that, I don’t take every bit of bait people throw toward me here. You’re free to think of me as you wish.
md
July 13th, 2012
3:19 pm
“So, Health conscious observer, paying for Medicaid improvements by revenue increases is just as fiscally responsible as paying by offsets.”
Interesting concept considering we choose everything we do…….and with that in mind, wouldn’t it be more prudent to require those asking for help that may have chosen to say drop out of school to get their butts back in school, get a better job and pay for their own needs??
Ragbatz
July 13th, 2012
4:01 pm
“.. wouldn’t it be more prudent to require those asking for help that may have chosen to say drop out of school to get their butts back in school, get a better job and pay for their own needs??”
By all means, let’s send those who would benefit to the point of self-sufficiency back to school. This does require schools up to the task and how we do that is a subject of some controversy, but compulsory education for self-sufficiency is a fine, old American idea.
Still, it is important to recognize that some are not capable of self-sufficiency no matter how much time they spend in school. Also, it is important to note that at this point in the economic life of the nation there are many who have been educated to and well beyond that necessary for self-sufficiency who are not able to find jobs.
As for getting “better” jobs, I think it is appalling that adequate health insurance is essentially cost-prohibitive to a full-time minimum wage worker ($15,300/year), what with the additional needs of food and shelter.
md
July 13th, 2012
4:25 pm
“This does require schools up to the task and how we do that is a subject of some controversy, but compulsory education for self-sufficiency is a fine, old American idea. ”
No it doesn’t…….it requires the gonads of an administration to say “if one wants xx, then one will do xx in exchange”……no school, no help.
Back to the “we choose everything we do” principle.
If they don’t want to help themselves….so be it, they can fend for themselves.
Ragbatz
July 13th, 2012
4:27 pm
And, for the record, I completely agree the potential benefit to Georgia resulting from establishment of the right of States to refuse the Medicaid expansion is huge if compared to what Georgia actually paid, and even compared to what Georgia might have had to pay had it not had a free ride.
Just, maybe not for the reasons you think. Part of the potential value to Georgia comes from the fact that other states may decide to turn down the expansion. A good part of the net flow of federal dollars in and out of states will tilt toward states that accept the expansion and away from states that reject it. Georgia now gets to decide whether the tilt is toward Georgia or away from Georgia.
md
July 13th, 2012
5:08 pm
“A good part of the net flow of federal dollars in and out of states will tilt toward states that accept the expansion and away from states that reject it.”
If that expansion is going to have significant implications as it most likely will for all balanced budget States, then those states will have to make that call. If states like CA continue to spend above it’s means and then requires the feds to bail them out, then I see a big fight in Congress down the pike.
GA’s problem is not the money coming from the feds, but the money needed not coming from the feds…….
They BOTH suck
July 13th, 2012
5:36 pm
The Gallup poll stated that a good percentage of doctors indicated that the practice preventive medicine
Gallup no where in that presentation backs up the 30% number within the Jackson Healthcare study
Keep trying
Wrong again
They BOTH suck
July 13th, 2012
5:37 pm
Hi Barry
Obamacare facts: Medicaid expansion points to new state taxes | POTUS NEWS
July 13th, 2012
11:30 pm
[...] Mayo Clinic stopped accepting Medicare and Medicaid patients at several of its facilities. The Atlanta Journal’s Kyle Wingfield cites a statistic that 42 percent of Georgia doctors will not accept new Medicaid [...]
Carly EngageAmerica
July 16th, 2012
2:45 pm
The ACA will not control costs. The Affordable Care Act is relying on dozens of pilot programs and demonstration projects to find better ways of delivering care, the results of which have been disappointing. Further, we will still be left with a system in which no one will be choosing between health care and other uses of money. And if no one is making those choices, health care spending will keep rising in the future with all the relentless persistence it has shown in the past (http://go.cms.gov/KuroN5).
Ragbatz
July 16th, 2012
3:30 pm
Kyle Wingfield at 3:13pm, 7/13
For the record:
The colloquy began with a posting by carlosgvv at 7:59am on 7/12 that said. “Georgia and other states have spent untold millions in legal fees fighting Obamacare[.]” At 9:29 am you replied: “In Georgia, at least, the legal services were provided pro bono by private attorneys. I know, I know, you don’t believe a thing you read.”
I pointed out (12:35pm, 7/13), and Wingfield later (1:44pm) acknowledged, that Georgia paid cash to Paul Clement for representation at the Supreme Court. I also noted (1:47pm) that the claim that Georgia was represented “pro bono” was a dubious description for the dubious practice of Georgia lending its name and prestige to litigation funded and executed by a private political action group with a financial interest in the litigation, in this case the NFIB.
I had the opportunity today to examine the case records from this litigation at the District Court and Court of Appeals levels. Not a single unpaid attorney is listed as representing the State of Georgia in the case at any level. The maximum extent of actual “pro bono” representation in the case seems to have come from a single Mercer law professor giving some advice to Sonny Perdue and Sam Olens, but who did not formally represent the State in the litigation. Georgia was actively represented in the lower courts by the same private firm lawyers who concurrently represented the NFIB and by paid counsel before the Supreme Court. Not one “pro bono” attorney represented Georgia in the litigation.
I invited Wingfield to discuss whether he thought it appropriate for a Governor or AG of Georgia to lend the name and prestige of the state to controversial, politically-charged legislation funded and carried out by a politcal action group with a financial stake in the litigation. (3:10pm, 7/13). He dismissed the invitation as “bait”, which he declined to take (3:13pm).
Attorney General Sam Olens himself declined an opportunity to defend the practice during a Q&A at a continuing legal education meeting last year.
But then, AG Olens is not the blogger/columnist who “corrected” his poster carlosgvv by writing that Georgia was represented by “pro bono by private attorneys” - and then doubled down with sarcasm about carlosgvv’s failure to trust what he reads.
Ragbatz
July 16th, 2012
4:26 pm
Carly @ 2:45pm. Catastrophic plans, available to those under 30, will have deductibles over $6K.
Kaiser Family Foundation estimates that Bronze plans offering 80:20 cost sharing will have a family of four deductible above $4K. Bronze with 70:30 cost sharing will have a much higher deductible. . ACA subsidies are based on the Bronze plans. Bronze plans of any benefit design will have an overall actuarial value of 60%, so that people covered under any bronze plans will be paying forty percent of their costs of care through deductibles and copays. This leaves room for a lot of incentive for people to compare costs of items of health care to costs of other things.
People will be able to opt for silver, gold, or platinum coverage with less cost-sharing on an item by item basis but they will compare health care to other goods when choosing between high premiums for fuller coverage and low premiums for basic bronze coverage. For low and moderate income families, ACA subsidies will only give premium support for bronze level coverage – so can expect bronze to be selected most by those who are likely to be most sensitive to choices between health care and alternatives.
As for the demostration projects, three points are worth making. First, are these even implemented yet? Most of the act’s provisions are not even in effect yet. Second, at most anything new under the Act that is all ready in effect can hardly have been in effect long enough for results to be clear. Feel free to identify the specific failures you have in mind.
Most importantly, do not forget the grandest demonstration projects at all. I refer to the provision that any state has the flexibility to produce whatever type of plan it wants, so long as it will achieve similar coverage to what the ACA will do, and the Secretary has the authority to just take essentially all federal health care money headed for that state and use it for its system, whatever it may be. Some states have already selected or are leaning to single payer, but there is no reason a state could not take the approach consistent with your suggestions. (Except that most health economists now believe, based on both models and on studies, that over-utliziation from low patient cost sharing is of signficantly lesser magnitude than the under-utlitization that would be sacrificied under high patient cost sharing, what with the Rand study having been debunked and all.
Ragbatz
July 16th, 2012
7:42 pm
Just a bit more on state flexibility under the ACA.
Kathleen Sebelius was President Obama’s choice to Secretary of HHS. She was a popular, Democratic, two-term Governor from Kansas, an inarguably red state. She is the person before whom state plans for alternative Medicaid arrangements would be presented. Her electoral history of being able to command a re-election majority in a red state suggests that there is every reason to think that she is politically open to the kind of Medicaid policy alternatives that command a Georgia majority.
It is also true that nearly every State has, under the “old” Medicaid program, been granted dozens of waivers of Medicaid rules by administrations of both political parties.
Near the beginning of these comments on Medicaid expansion, Kyle Wingfield scolds liberals for too readily assume that conservative disagreeing about health care insurance methods were also disagreeing about health care goals. This is a fair criticism of some of the comments to which he was responding. Still, it seems to me that Wingfield himself has been entirely quick to presume that Georgia, under Medicaid expansion, would be denied the opportunity of flexible invention, like WIngfield’s (sole?) idea of charging different premiums to differently situated families. Maybe he does not know that States are expressly allowed to meet the common health care GOALS of the ACA by a breadth of different METHODS. Maybe he just does not trust that Kathleen Sebelius is committed to the Act’s goals rather than its methods. Or maybe, he just demands that liberals trust conservative protestations of common goals, but does not reciprocate by trusting that liberals at HHS would allow conservative methods to common health care goals.
When the ACA was before Congress, any Republican committed a few good ideas – like insisting that States be free to implement WIngfield’s suggestion – could have had his or her ideas for improvement enacted simply by saying “Do these and you will have my vote.” It’s called “compromise”, and it’s often possible to do when the parties share common goals but disagree on methods.
But Senate Minority Leader McConnell made clear that the primary goal of his caucus was defeating Barack Obama for re-election. Republicans simply refrained from meaningful efforts to improve the Affordable Care Act.
Gee, whiz, it sure is a shame that Kyle’s Great Idea did not get locked in stone as part of the ACA. Thank your lucky stars Georgia has a good chance of having the Wingfield METHOD approved by Kathleen Sebelius under the ACA as written, so long Georgia can show that doing so will meet the GOALS of the legislation.
Unless, perhaps, American liberals and conservatives have different goals. American liberals have the goal of universal health care. This also happens to be the policy of every major liberal party, and every major conservative party, in every developed country on the planet, with the sole exception of the Republican Party. If American conservatives have a different goal, and they certainly seem to, then liberals need not be scolded for thinking the ACA debate really is about goals.
Ragbatz
July 16th, 2012
9:36 pm
Below, the citation to a study showing that Medicaid patient acceptance rates are comparable to capitated private insurance (think HMO) new patient acceptance rates. This provides an interesting perspective on the half of Wingfield’s article that relies on low Medicaid new patient acceptance rates. Maybe 42% of Georgia physicians aren’t accepting new patients of any kind. Wingfield’s stat on the percent declining Medicaid patients is the basis of most of his case against the Medicaid expansion, but it would seem to be useless without any basis for comparison.
Declines in Physician Acceptance of Medicare and Private Coverage. Arch Intern Med. 2011;171(12):1117-1119. doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2011.251.
timbo
July 16th, 2012
10:36 pm
Regarding the problem of doctors accepting Medicaid due to low reimbursement rates: for 2013 and 2014 the Health Care Act mandates that Medicaid reimbursements must be at 100% if the Medicare rate, and the difference is fully financed by the federal government.
Ragbatz
July 17th, 2012
9:26 am
Timbo at 10:36. Nice catch.
M. Umair Javaid
July 19th, 2012
12:00 am
I am so tired of this. As long as you have healthcare you will never know what it is like to go without it. No matter what, money will always be the bottom line. Undoubtedly, it is a factor to consider, but it seems like its the only one anyone ever considers. I live below the federal poverty line with a family of four and both my wife and I work full time, still we don’t seem to be eligible for Medicaid. Your looking for some sort of panacea for healthcare and some vision of a utopia that has never existed in any healthcare system at anytime in any place in the world. You must sacrifice something somewhere; but I guess what does it matter if your neighbor dies of a curable illness as long as you feel your protected. So much for living in a society.