Join the debate

Jump in the Crossfire by using #Crossfire on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram.

Jump in the Crossfire by using #Crossfire
on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram.

November 6th, 2013
10:13 PM ET

In the Crossfire: Medicaid Expansion

Sen. Bernie Sanders attacks Sen. David Vitter over Louisiana's decision to not accept Medicaid expansion.

What do you think? Do you think all states should accept Medicaid expansion?

Posted by
Filed under: Bernie Sanders • David Vitter • Debates
soundoff (12 Responses)
  1. MiCoTx

    Healthcarebrains makes some very good points, however Obamacare while it tries (and is in the process of failing) to increase access to INSURANCE does nothing to increase access to HEALTHCARE. It's an important distinction not many people think about. If states expand medicaid, then yes, the hospitals may receive higher "dish" payments mainly through ER/Trauma type visits. However, if that same patient then needs to see a specialist and they're on medicaid, that specialist can still refuse to see the patient or the wait time may be months. I see it every day and I live in a state where medicaid wasn't expanded.

    November 15, 2013 at 1:00 pm | Reply
  2. Hector Slagg

    With more people on Welfare than working it is extremely difficult to fund the Social Programs. Obama Care is keeping employers from any hiring. state Government Government's are still running deficits many places.

    November 14, 2013 at 9:28 am | Reply
  3. Eddie Fonseca

    Jimmy Cliff a Jamaican singer who wrote Many Rivers to Cross which was a popular song back in the late 70's and 80's he talked about the struggles of the middle class people, when we think about Medicaid in America for the poor people who don't have medical insurance to pay for doctors or nurses to treat the basic medical health needs, which other country's across the globe have access to which is free health care to treat their citizens. Being an American who has traveled to different country's the citizen's in other country's have right to access health care, because unlike the United States of America it's illegal for those country's to make a profit from sick people. As Americans we know our health is the most important thing, without access to a free Medicaid or Universal Health Care will million of American's die from diseases which could be treated in this great nation for years to come.

    November 11, 2013 at 11:33 pm | Reply
  4. Minnie Mouse

    Why put millions on Medicaid when they will not be provided for? Most doctors limit the number of Medicaid patients and the care is limited as well. Our country is not in anyfinancial position to pay for everyone's health care at 100%. If every state expands Medicaid then people need to be required to pay more taxes into Medicaid who are not disabled, seniors or veterans.

    The higher taxes won't be such a burden as it would be to have to pay the costs in full at 100% for health care. The costs are high for health care and I agree that some people do need help due to lower income but not at 100% if you are fully capable of working full time.

    It's not easy for the people in the middle class and it won't be easy for the people in the lower class either but it needs to be done this way to help absorb the costs to where they are not all shifted up the states and government. The money has to come from somewhere.

    November 11, 2013 at 10:51 am | Reply
    • healthcarebrains

      Yes, the money is coming from "dish" payments that are being re-allocated by the government to fund Medicaid expansion fully for the first 3 years and then 90% for the following years. The "dish" payments are dissolving; not expanding Medicaid is a stupid, greedy double-whammy.

      November 11, 2013 at 8:42 pm | Reply
  5. Jana

    Medicaid has to be expanded. I live in Idaho, where the governor chose not to expand Medicaid. Unemployment and low wages are still putting people with no insurance. My grandson was on Medicaid as his mother could absolutely not find a job, and the minimum wage jobs that are available around here do not offer insurance. Her children are covered until they turn 19. Three months before he turned 19, he was hospitalized and diagnosed with Type 1 diabetes. Turned 19 and was kicked off Medicaid. He works at Burger King for minimum wage and sporadic hours. I have researched, called and gone to seminars. His only option until a better job just happens to magically come to town is county indigent services that he would have to pay back....with what? He's a teenager. He is going to die because his mother makes $10 an hour and I make barely more. He is not the only one in Idaho in this situation. Low wages are going to kill (murder) young people with no options for better jobs or education in this state. One welfare worker told me he could get a girl pregnant and live with her. Really????? Where are the souls in these Republican governors? Is it legalized murder?

    November 10, 2013 at 2:11 am | Reply
    • Jamie

      In South Carolina, Medicaid expansion was also denied. After applying I was rejected because I did not have dependent children. I was granted instead a limited access to the women's clinic for birth control. They will pay for me to not have kids. Only enough for me to not have them. Not enough to feed them or give me medical care. But if I ignore that and get pregnant I qualify them and myself for Medicaid and snap.

      November 13, 2013 at 6:56 am | Reply
  6. jamesherbertharrison

    Bernie Sanders made the argument that government employees should be treated the same way as employees in the private sector when defending the special exception Congressional staff will get from Obamacare. What has he been smoking? Employees in the private sector must do their job to keep their job. Private sector employees do not get automatic raises when their employee has lost money every year for the past fifteen. Private sector employees, when laid off temporarily because of any type of shutdown, do not get back pay when they return to work. While many private sector employees receive a health insurance benefit from their employer, most must pay a substantial percentage of it, a cost that will likely increase dramatically because of Obamacare. Senator Sanders seems to have no idea how private enterprise works and could not succeed in that environment, himself. This is true of most rabid socialists.

    November 9, 2013 at 5:28 am | Reply
  7. healthcarebrains

    My governor, TN Gov Haslam, along with 29 Republican governors, rejected Medicaid expansion as a corollary to the ACA. In a nutshell:
    1) Federal "dish" payments that give states 'free' money to compensate for emergency room care ended Sept 30th.
    2) Those "dish" payments were re-allocated to fund Medicaid expansion at the state level and would be 100% fully funded by the federal government for 3 years and 90% federally-funded thereafter.

    Basically, by rejecting Medicaid expansion states not only lose out on dish payments but also federal funding for Medicaid. It's a double-whammy. And the federal deficit is independent of this since that can not be solved on a state level. And talking about the federal deficit regarding extending healthcare to all citizens is a bit disingenuous after we racked up a $800,000,000,000 on a credit card to fund a completely useless war.

    Political profit > people for governors rejecting Medicaid expansion.

    November 8, 2013 at 5:00 pm | Reply
  8. healthcarebrains

    My Governor, TN Gov Haslam, along with 29 Republican governors, rejected Medicaid expansion as a corollary to the ACA because they are political opportunists. In a nutshell:
    1) Federal "dish" payments that give states 'free' money to compensate for emergency room care ended Sept 30th.
    2) Those "dish" payments were re-allocated to fund Medicaid expansion at the state level and would be 100% fully funded by the federal government for 3 years and then 90% federally funded thereafter. States would only have to pick up 10% of the tab after the initial 3 years!

    Basically, by rejecting Medicaid expansion states not only lose out on dish payments but also federal funding for Medicaid. Federal deficits are a wholly independent issue since that can't be solved at the state level and the money is re-allocated from another program. And extending healthcare to citizens is much more noble than the $800,000,000,000 tab rung up on a useless war.

    Political profit > people for those governors rejecting Medicaid expansion.

    November 8, 2013 at 4:56 pm | Reply
  9. simplyput

    States that won't expand medicaid don't want bankruptcy. For that matter, what person in his right mind wants Medicaid? Poor healthcare, no doctor choice and living off other people's money...sounds great for Florida, but some of us would rather pay cash that go with a bankrupt, fruadulent program. If you don't pay a fine for Obamacare, thank a republican governor who saw through the ACA BS.

    November 7, 2013 at 4:05 pm | Reply
  10. Pete

    Medicaid has to be expanded especially in red states that get more in federal handouts than contribute back in federal,state revenues ...In Florida Rick Scott turned down the ACA plan, than saw the consequences and later opted for it but his brainless republican minions in the state capital saw otherwise and not only turned the ACA plan down but also Medicaid expansion..Now in 2014 when over a million new Medicaid policys are needed for an ever booming state only about 600,000 will be covered..Nice ha and you republicans thought you were people friendly,what ignorents.....

    November 7, 2013 at 8:58 am | Reply

Post a comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 94 other followers