Let's phase out Medicaid use the savings to provide subsidies for

[Tony_FLADEM]

former Medicaid recipients to participate in the private health care exchange or the public option.

In this way you can have a public option that is available to everyone and have true competition.

[pinto]

1. Medicaid and Medicare *are* public options. So I'm missing your point.

:shrug:

[Tony_FLADEM]

3. You would have competition with the private insurance companies

not just via the public option, but also with former Medicaid recipients. Further, these people would be able to earn more money and still be able to get insurance.

[jwirr]

14. What people could earn more money? The elderly in nursing homes?

My daughter who has been severely disabled for the last 51 years?

Not to sound like the idiot teabaggers but "keep you hands off Medicaid".

[Tony_FLADEM]

15. Your daugher would not be effected. She would be given a subsidy

for either private insurance our the premium that would be associated with the public option. Some people on Medicaid might choose to have private insurance.

I rather have a public option that is open to everyone than only Medicaid.

[jwirr]

As to an open government program - I have suggested that we combine

Medicare/Medicaid and open it to everyone who wants it.

Here in MN those who are on Medicaid are asked to choose an insurance company HMO that will work best for us. My daughter is using MA:Blue Cross/Blue Shield and it works pretty well for her although we have had to fight some of their decisions.

I am old enough that I had to choose a Medicare part D plan for drugs and I started out with Humana but after a year they wanted to charge a higher fee. I then went to Medica and now have Medica for both Medicare and Medicaid needs. So far I have been satisfied with them.

I am afraid of the day when they are disconnected from the government plans and they can treat her the way they would if there was no government control. That is why I would not like to see Medicaid phased out. It is the control that regulates these insurance companies.

[Raineyb]

53. Why the hell should we have private for profit insurance companies involved in primary care?

Let them cover private rooms and boob jobs like they do in other countries (while making a profit doing so) and get these leeches the hell out of our health care.

[katkat]

2. what? Kindly try explaining that again, thx. n/t

[Tony_FLADEM]

5. People who oppose the public option don't want the government to have too

much influence in health care. If you make Medicaid competitive that is a way of remedying that. These people would still get subsidies for either the public option or private insurance, but it would be more competitive.

[liberalhistorian]

22. Many people who opposed the public option

also clutch their Medicare cards very tightly, with no intention of letting it go. They don't mind having the public option for THEMSELVES that WE pay for, but WE can't use it if we're not 65 or over; selfish hypocritical bullshit on their part. They don't have a problem with a "public option" for THEM, but fuck the rest of us, even though many of us pay for it through taxes but can't afford our own insurance. That's their attitude.

[Tony_FLADEM]

28. I totally agree with you. the Medicare taxes only pay for a few years.

[eShirl]

4. you mean so profit can be skimmed off the top?

[Tony_FLADEM]

6. You would have competition going both ways

Former Medicaid Recipients >---Health Insurance Companies
The Public Option <---- Health Insurance Companines

[eShirl]

7. I look at that and think "scam."

Sorry, that's just me.

[Tony_FLADEM]

8. It makes the public option easier to sell politically if Medicaid

also has to compete in the health insurance market. Those with low incomes would not be hurt because they would be given subsidies. The only difference is that they could choose a private plan if they want or the public option which would be available to everyone. If money is saved because Medicaid would be more competitive that would help pay for overall reform.

[RobinA]

24. Hello!

Private insurance companies don't WANT Medicaid recipients, so why would they bother to compete for them.

[Tony_FLADEM]

30. If reform is enacted the insurance companies would not be able

to discriminate against those with a pre-existing condition.

[havocmom]

9. So, whacha drinkin this evening?

And just how much?

I have seen couches make more sense.

[Tony_FLADEM]

11. Allowing Medicaid to have a certain level of competition with private

insurance companies is a way to help the public option be more viable politically. Right now the public option is in trouble because House Democrats are in favor of it, and the Senate is somewhat skeptical.

In this way, you can have a strong public option and still serve the needs of those on Medicaid.

[KoKo]

17. Medicaid IS a Public Plan and is more cost effective...it should be expanded

to include those who can't afford health insurance and an option to those who have insurance but have such high deductibles that it's almost useless.

Medicaid doesn't have to compete. It's already a "Public Option" for those who can't afford health care but it's too limited in income requirements. Needs to be expanded.

[Tony_FLADEM]

23. Yes, Medicaid is a program for those who can't afford health care

However, some people go on Medicaid out of necessity because they have a host of health problems. They limit what they make because they need the insurance.

I rather have have a public option that is available to everyone (those on medicaid & those without insurance).

If you want to lift the income limit on Medicaid, that's fine, but no one is discussing that.

[havocmom]

37. OP{ has to know that. At this point, OP seems to want to 'drown it in bathtub'

wonder what other motives OP could possibly have. ;)

[Tony_FLADEM]

40. My motives are to have a public option that gives people an

alternative if they don't want private health insurance. The people on Medicaid should have that choice as well. You would meet the needs of the people on Medicaid through subsidies and still have your public option. Oh well, I guess no public option and the Democrats have a big political problem.

[DainBramaged]

10. Wow, been smoking cardboard or sumthing?

[Tony_FLADEM]

13. Not smoking anything. As it looks now it looks like

there will be no public option. If you make Medicaid more competitve in the health care marketplace, you can sway those who are skeptical of too much government influence in health care, and still meet the objective of reform which is to lower costs and provide coverage for everyone.

That's all.

[DainBramaged]

18. You sound like a talking point I read from the RNC

Medicaid has a less than 3% administrative cost to the Government. How much more competitive can you get?

Don't bother replying, I am not interested in changing Medicaid or compromising with the Reich wing.


http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/04/republicans-lets-privatize-medicare.php

The substitute gradually converts the current Medicare program into one in which Medicare beneficiaries choose the most affordable coverage that best suits their individual needs. For individuals 55 or older, Medicare will not be changed (other than income-relating the prescription drug benefit): the budget preserves the existing program for these beneficiaries. To make the program sustainable and dependable, those 54 and younger will enroll in a new Medicare Program with health coverage similar to what is now available to Members of Congress and Federal employees.


http://www.heritage.org/research/healthcare/bg1674.cfm



ANYTHING to privatize a Federal program to the benefit of Big Business. Give me a break.

[Tony_FLADEM]

27. I don't think you can have Medicaid AND a public option given the

trillion dollar budget deficts. You can meet the objective of having a public option that allows for competition and increased coverage, and still meet the needs of Medicaid recipients thru either private insurance (if they choose) or the public option.

[Mari333]

29. stop both 'wars' and we will be able to fund health care for everyone. nt

[ipaint]

21. How about we make the insurance companies more competitive in the medicare market

following medicare rules with profit caps and low overhead limits.

[Cleita]

12. Stop inhaling the fumes from the paint remover in the garage.

It's really affecting your thinking.

[DefenseLawyer]

16. Where exactly is the savings?

If you take the money that is being used to sustain Medicaid and give that money to the insurance industry to provide insurance (minus 30% profit and administration costs) to the same people, that's going to create savings? Looks like you picked a bad week to quit drinking.

Or are you saying that we can sell reform more easily if that reform sticks it to "deadbeats"?

[Tony_FLADEM]

25. the private health insurance would be optional.

Some people might choose that. I think the 30% administrative cost would be lower because there would be more competition.

[Oregone]

36. Can I just shoot myself in the head already?

Fuckn nuts country with nuts people

[DavidDvorkin]

19. Instead, let's have single-payer universal health care.

[liberalhistorian]

20. No thank you. My stepdad is in his mid-60's and in a

nursing home, thanks mostly to Medicaid minus the half of his pension that is used for it, the other half of it they so graciously allowed mom to keep so she can survive. There is no way in hell we'd have the money otherwise (several thousand a fucking MONTH), and he requires the kind of 24/7 skilled care that we just can't begin to know how to give. They worked and paid into the system over forty years, being productive, contributing citizens, and deserve to get that back now. No private insurere would touch him; hell, they'll barely look at perfectly healthy people over fifty, give me a fucking break.

The private insurance companies are the real problem. We've had far less trouble with Medicaid and Medicare than with any private insurance company, who make and maximize their profits by denying care and dropping policies on anyone who sneezes for more than a couple of days. And good luck getting ANY individual policy at all if you're over 45, even if you're healthy. And if you're over fifty and trying to find a job, good luck with that since they don't like having to have older people on their group health insurance. To put it politely, take your private insurance and shove it. THEY are the cause of eighty percent of the problem, if not more.

[Tony_FLADEM]

26. The private insurance for Medicaid recipients would be optional

I rather have a public option that allows everyone to buy in than solely the Medicaid program.

[Motown_Johnny]

31. someone failed math

how can you use the savings from Medicaid to provide for the people who were on Medicaid plus others?

[Tony_FLADEM]

33. You would still need to raise revenue to provide

subsidies for those who are not on Medicaid. If you can generate savings in Medicaid because some choose the private insurance, then that can help with this.

[eShirl]

34. You think private insurance is capable of providing what Medicaid does, cheaper?

I don't understand how anyone could come up with such a notion. It's like you're saying 2+2=10.

[Tony_FLADEM]

35. The person on Medicaid would make the choice

In order to have a public option you could do something with Medicaid and achieve this. I guess people want to leave Medicaid as is, so no public option, and a big political problem for Obama. Oh well, I tried.

[Motown_Johnny]

44. Medicaid is for the poor, they can't possibly afford private insurance

so what is the point of dismantling a program that is working ?

[Tony_FLADEM]

47. They would get a subsidy and choose private health insurance or the

public option. Making Medicaid more choice oriented is a way of helping the public option. They can't say the government is "taking over healthcare" if the people on existing government health care programs are given more choice.

[Motown_Johnny]

32. Let's phase out Corporate Subsidies and use the $96 Billion a year to keep Americans from dieing

[havocmom]

38. Your whole stint in this thread sure looks like more 'confuse 'em to convince

somebody and is just the sort of co-op-then-twist-to-confuse-those who-don't-do-critical-thinking we have seen far too much of in America since, oh about the Reagan years.

[Tony_FLADEM]

39. If you give the people on Medicaid the same options as those

being brought into the system - either private health insurance or the public option - you could have the public option. This would have made the public option easier to sell politically and perhaps saved some money.

No one in the health care debate wants to yield on anything, on both sides, so I guess there isn't going to be a public option.

[havocmom]

41. THEY ALREADY DO HAVE THAT OPTION

we want to reverse it and give everyone the option of going into Medicare-like program.

Did ya notice all the protesters at town halls who were ON Medicare saying they wanted to keep Medicare? Ever think there was a reason? No, because you are too busy being a mouthpiece for Big Insurance.

[Tony_FLADEM]

42. I'm not a mouthpiece for Big Insurance

I'm on Medicaid as well. I'm not really poor - more out of medical necessity since I've had 16 surgeries. I'm not aware that Medicaid recipients can choose private insurance. I live in Florida - perhaps in other states.


I just want to make the public option more viable politically. If you do something with Medicaid that creates more choices so people can't say the government is "taking over health care" I think that would be a good idea.


I wish the Democratic Congress people at the town hall meetings would bring a sign up sheet and allow people to forfeit their Medicare benefits. Very few people would agree to this, and that would help those who want the public option.

[eShirl]

45. You're on Medicaid and you're not poor? BULLCRAP!!

Even if you're considered disabled and on Medicare, you're not eligible for Medicaid unless your income is low enough.

[Tony_FLADEM]

46. In Florida you can make $2,000 per month and be eligible.

I don't consider that poor, but some people might. I haven't had any health problems since 1999 and haven't been to the doctor in a few years, so I'm lucky I guess.

[Bluerthanblue]

48. you are "lucky"- and i'm not believing the earnings you

claim allows one to be eligible for medicaid - a single person? or a family of 10?

If you have assets that = 2,000 in my state, you are not eligible for Medicaid- that includes your vehicle, personal possessions, even your children's savings acct. A lien is placed on your home- as well. Which is collectable upon your death.

If you've ever had to experience this, you'd likely feel quite a bit different.

As a single mother, with pre-existing serious health issues, i'm unwilling to leave my children bancrupt, homeless, and motherless- so Medicaid is not an option for me.


:shrug:

[Tony_FLADEM]

49. Here is the information

{www.virtuallawoffice.com/Medicaid3.html]



2009 Florida Medicaid Asset/Income Numbers.



Gross income for the applicant - Less than $2,022* per month
Gross income for the spouse - Unlimited



Spousal income diversion - min. $1,750 max. $2,739
Spousal excess shelter standard - $525


Assets** allowed for the applicant - $2,000
Assets** allowed for a low income (less than $808 per mo.) $5,000
Assets allowed for the well spouse - $109,560
Transfer penalty divisor - 5,000
*If income is higher an income trust will be required.

**Assets must below the limit at least one day during each month the application is pending for approval


The only thing is that you can't have more than $2,000 in cash or equivalent i.e. stocks

[Bluerthanblue]

50. are you in a Nursing Home???

:shrug:

[Tony_FLADEM]

51. no

The that income limit applies to everyone on Medicaid.

[barbiegeek]

43. NO NO NO NO

[GreenPartyVoter]

52. No, thank you. I am on Medicaid and there is no way what you are proposing would

be less expensive than $2 co-pays, or give full medical, and dental coverage (including orthodontists) for my kids.

I appreciate the sentiment but there has to be another way. :hi: