NY Times - "The Ryan Plan for Medicaid"

[TomCADem]

Here is a nice discussion of the GOP's efforts to "reform" Medicaid by destroying that does not praise the plan for being "bold." Once again Republicans spare the rich, and balance the budget on the backs of the vulnerable.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/01/opinion/01sun1.html

Here’s how Medicaid currently works: Washington sets minimum requirements for who can enroll and what services must be covered, and pays half of the bill in the richest states and three-quarters of the bill in the poorest state. If people are poor enough to qualify and a medical service recommended by their doctors is covered, the state and federal governments will pick up the tab, with minimal co-payments by the beneficiaries. That is a big plus for enrollees’ health, and a healthy population is good for everyone. But the costs are undeniably high.

Enter the House Republicans’ budget proposal. Instead of a commitment to insure as many people as meet the criteria, it would substitute a set amount per state. Starting in 2013, the grant would probably equal what the state would have received anyway through federal matching funds, although that is not spelled out. After that, the block grant would rise each year only at the national rate of inflation, with adjustments for population growth.

There are several problems with that, starting with that inflation-pegged rate of growth, which could not possibly keep pace with the rising cost of medical care. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that federal payments would be 35 percent lower in 2022 than currently projected and 49 percent lower in 2030.

To make up the difference, states would probably have to cut payments to doctors, hospitals or nursing homes; curtail eligibility; reduce benefits; or increase their own payments for Medicaid. The problems do not end there. If a bad economy led to a sharp jump in unemployment, a state’s grant would remain the same. Nor would the block grant grow fast enough to accommodate expensive advances in medicine, rising demand for long-term care, or unexpected health care needs in the wake of epidemics or natural disasters. This would put an ever-tightening squeeze on states, forcing them to drop enrollees, cut services or pump up their own contributions.

[midnight]

1. K&R. I hope Paul Ryan has more town hall meetings so people

can explain to him how wrong he is...

[999998th word]

3. Teabaggers are now being bussed in to pack the meetings.

Someone on a credible local site I frequent posted a link from a teabag site putting

out the 'call' and contact info begging for help to 'quiet the loud liberals and get our message out'...

'you don't need to live in this state to participate in these meetings,your help is needed'



It was only a matter of time before they corrupted these meetings--again.

TGOP = STANK.

[999998th word]

4. Sorry ^edited for don't know how to link

son hasn't shown me yet.:blush:

[Bozita]

2. Couldn't resist posting this Mike Thompson toon ...

[murphyj87]

5. I know in Kansas.....

I know in Kansas, the only way you can qualify for Medicaid is if you have an annual income under $4000. If you make $4001 a year you can't get Medicaid. Is that true everywhere in the US?

http://www.youtube.com/v/T6i3RZdu7_k?fs=1

[nenagh]

6. I'd like to know if the real reason the Repubs/Corporations want to break Medicaid ..

is to allow coverage for procedures not currently covered by Medicaid..

Which would be a cash cow for some, but costs would surely skyrocket.

I know in the Canadian system, in patients over 65 yrs, that certain meds and/or medical procedures are restricted ie not 'covered'.. based on the patient's clinical condition.

eg. I've had certain kind of cancer.. and now that I'm over 65.. the Ontario gov't will not pay for a bone marrow transplant.. Note: it will pay for many other meds and procedures..

So it occurred to me that, if the Medicaid and Medicare systems use similar restrictions of coverage, if that system of restrictions is broken...

It would be hugely beneficial to some medical groups.. but the overall costs could be enormous.

[eilen]

7. There are some restrictions, often on particular medications

within Medicaid.
For cancer treatment this might be applicable to newer meds that have been developed for nausea/vomiting and pain as well as certain newer biomeds.

Plus, many people who can qualify under certain conditions have what are called "spend downs". Any (and I mean any) undisclosed income can immediately cancel the medicaid and that includes a tax refund, an old 401K that has been found, a savings bond redeemed, the sale of one's home, social security, disability or pension income of a retiring spouse.

It can be tricky and the poverty level that is required is to me, embarrassing for our society. Hospital foundations will help but only to a degree -- like only half the prescription filled (paid for) for pain meds-- that kind of thing. If you don't have the scratch for the other half, lots of luck because the Dr. will not write another script for that month.