Virginia has to pony up a percentage of those Medicaid funds after a few years. Typical federal BS, get states dependent then start making them pay for their dependency, giving them less and less control over their own budgets.
First couple of doses are free…
Yes, 5% in 2017, 10% max after 2020. Max.
But the time for a good spite tantrum is now. No matter the human cost.
That’s not nothing. And since most states have balanced budget amendments, that means they have to cut other spending or raise taxes.
And let’s not forget that Democrats tried to use state dependency in an unconstitutional fashion, to make states toe the line.
Care to explain that last line? I’m not following.
Neither is the death count.
Raise taxes! Gasp! Horrors!
The relevance of that statement being what?
And the rest is free. Free lunch.
ACA required states to expand Medicaid or else lose all Medicaid funding. The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that this was unconstitutional.
You were asked about its relevance to the discussion. Still waiting.
Terr, the death count continues as long as care is left unavailable. Simple math. Up to you to decide if that’s as important as feeling like you’re “getting” Obama for something. But, if you can *joke *about “thinking about the children”, that’s not to be expected, is it?
Simple math for simple minds. Republicans are killing your gramma. And children, of course. Won’t someone think of the children!
Sadly, yes, Terr, obviously you *do *think it’s all a damn joke.
Sadly, you think that costs should not be a consideration at all with social programs. Who cares how much it costs, as long as you’re so caring about everyone.
Elvis also ignores the studies that show that Medicaid is no better than having no insurance at all.
But results don’t matter to liberals either. Moral preening is what they get off on.
No. There are costs, but they’re small, and a foolish way to economize in a state or federal budget given their benefits.
Meanwhile, you aren’t willing to consider benefits at all, are you? And you aren’t even aware what the costs are; what matters to you is defeating Obamacare by any means necessary, a piece at a time if that’s what’s available to you. “Win-win” my pasty white ass.
Translation: “Yeah, fuck 'em.”
Already showed you otherwise, and you counter with something from a front organization promoting “free market solutions”. Well, it does tell you what you want to hear, doesn’t it?
Yes, availability of medical care doesn’t really help your health, does it? Wow.
The results are what *permit *moral preening. Obviously you prefer whatever the hell you call the thing you do instead.
Actually, that could prove to be a telling point. Rural hospitals very much need Medicaid expansion in order to provide service for rural people. These are the very people the Pubbies claim to love so dear, and represent a pretty important constituency when it comes to gerrymandering districts to dilute the power of urban centers. The pressure is already building.
Look at McConnel, trying to pretend that Kentucky’s version of Medicaid is somehow totally different from Obamacare, that Obamacare can be ripped out “root and branch”, and everything in Kentucky will be peachy-keen. Its a bald lie, and a pretty stupid one. But what else does he have?
At the two minute warning, Team Obamacare is up by twenty four points. The game isn’t over, but the fans are heading for the parking lot and the commentators are reading off the credits. Team Repeal has six quarterbacks, no playbook, and no receivers.
Of course. $431 billion. Small costs indeed. 22% of each state’s budget, on average. Peanuts. And that’s in 2012 - before the huge expansion of Medicaid in Obamacare. I see that it is estimated Obamacare will expand Medicaid by $465 billion. That more than doubles it. Tiny, small costs. But hey - you care! That’s what’s important.
Liberals will make a better world, and they’ll take every penny you have to make it happen.
We could try, but since incomes rise when Democrats are in power, it’s hard to keep ahead.