A good proposal
Published June 1, 2014
by Chris Fitzsimon, NC Policy Watch and NC SPIN panelist, published in Greenville Daily Reflector, May 31, 2014.
A group of state lawmakers led by Rep. Verla Insko and Sen. Ben Clark has come up with an idea that you would think House and Senate leaders would consider immediately, no matter how short they want the summer legislative session to be.
It is a plan that would save lives, create jobs, and save the state money both in the long run and next year — when it would free up $26 million that could help with restoring cuts to classrooms or giving state employees a well-deserved raise.
The plan would also provide health care coverage for more than 350,000 adults in North Carolina who are uninsured.
It is a simple idea. House and Senate bills filed the first two days of the legislative session would expand Medicaid in North Carolina under the Affordable Care Act and help the economy, help local hospitals, help the state budget, and most importantly help hundreds of thousands of people get the health care they need and deserve.
Just a few months ago, a tax preparation firm released a report showing that Medicaid expansion would save employers money by allowing them to avoid a tax penalty for low-wage workers who are not currently eligible for Medicaid.
Leaders of this General Assembly always claim to be looking out for the best interests of employers.
A study from Harvard released at roughly the same time found that expanding Medicaid could literally save the lives of as many as 1,200 people in North Carolina thanks to preventive screenings and preventive management.
Leaders of this General Assembly also like to remind voters that they are strongly pro-life.
Then there is the study by the Institute of Medicine that found Medicaid expansion would create 23,000 jobs in North Carolina over the next ten years.
Leaders of the House and Senate have said for the last three years that job creation is their top priority.
When the House and Senate passed legislation last year to deny Medicaid expansion, they gave three primary reasons.
Medicaid in North Carolina was broken with huge cost overruns and it wouldn’t be responsible to expand it. The state couldn’t afford it even though the federal government would pick up 100 percent of the cost initially and 90 percent after that. And that it was part of the Affordable Care Act known as Obamacare that would be repealed.
More than 400,000 people in North Carolina have signed up for coverage during the initial enrollment period for Obamacare. That far exceeded projections for the state and is even more remarkable when you consider that lawmakers decided not to set up a state health care exchange and rejected $74 million in federal grants to help citizens sign up for coverage.
The Affordable Care Act is the law of the land and politicians can either continue to complain about it and refuse to allow the people they represent to benefit, or they can move forward and figure out how to make it work like the majority of states have done, states with Democratic governors and states with Republican governors.
It’s hard to come up with an idea that would immediately help more people and families in North Carolina than expanding Medicaid. And it’s hard to think of one proposal that fits so perfectly with the agenda of the pro-business legislative leadership committed to creating jobs and saving lives.
Maybe they could rename the bills the act to create the Carolina Comeback.
http://www.reflector.com/opinion/fitzsimon/fitzsimon-good-proposal-2492779
June 1, 2014 at 6:55 pm
Norm Kelly says:
Funny how predictable libs are. Two members of the NCGA are named right at the beginning of this post. But no mention of party affiliation. That's because they are both Demoncrats. When libs refer to another lib, they leave off reference to party. When libs refer to a Republican, they point out the party affiliation first. Or they make some snide comment about who their supporters are, something like Art Pope-supported Rep ... or Koch brothers-supported Senator ...
A plan from demons that would SAVE the state money? Unheard of! This is an oxymoron if ever there was one! Create jobs? If it's a demon plan, would these be government jobs or would they be real jobs? Would this cost the state in both lost tax revenue, benefits, and salary? Or would it be a net gain for the state in income tax revenue, reduction in unemployment payments, private sector pay that translates into sales tax income for the state?
Somehow I knew this was going to be a pitch for socialism, somehow, but didn't expect it to be a pitch for Obamacancer. How does stealing money from one group of people, filtering it through layers of government bureaucracy, then passing a portion of it to doctors and hospitals at a rate less than it costs those institutions to provide the services, giving the money to another group of people, help the economy? Is it possible for people to get medical care WITHOUT involving the bureaucrats? Without passing money through layers of government agencies, diluting the final output of dollars to the system? Without implementing socialized medicine?
Create 23,000 jobs over 10 years. Government jobs or private sector jobs? Government jobs would just be another drag on the economy and be worse for the state, economically. Private sector jobs? How many MORE private sector jobs could be created if we simply dropped the idea of socialized medicine? How many MORE private sector jobs could be created if the government, at every level, stopped stealing money from producers to give to non-producers or favored groups? How many more private sector jobs could be created if this implementation of socialized medicine didn't force us to pay for illegal immigrants care? Yeah, I know. Obamascare doesn't cover illegals. What else have you been told that is so obviously a lie that you believe? Do you believe that requiring voter ID is meant to suppress black voters? Common sense is missing in you life; you choose to believe lies for no apparent reason.
'The Affordable Care Act is the law of the land '. Funny how libs pick & choose the laws they use this statement on. Don't ask don't tell was the law of the land also until libs decided they didn't like it so wouldn't enforce it. Investors being covered in a bankruptcy prior to employees being compensated is also the law of the land, but the occupier chose to ignore that one also and stiffed the investors in favor of unions. There are other examples of libs choosing which laws to enforce, like at the border, voting by legal residents only, but they whine when conservatives know it's the law of the land but fight through proper channels to get it changed. No conservative is choosing to ignore the law. It's a stupid law, forced on us by a single party in Washington, prior to reading the bill, that will have a negative impact for the majority of citizens. But not a single conservative is choosing to violate the law. Unlike libs who regularly ignore laws of the land. Like when the occupier chooses to ignore the requirement to notify Congress that he struck a deal with terrorists for doing a prisoner swap. He didn't notify Congress and is now making excuses as to why this is so. But, libs, it is the law of the land, so why is this one ignored also?
Maybe, if libs actually had open minds, they would see that alternatives to socialized medicine have been proposed. Many of them. And libs have been completely close-minded on EVERY one of them. Libs want NO ALTERNATIVE to socialized medicine. Ask K sometime how she feels about socialized medicine and any alternative. She will tell you that single payer is the ultimate goal. She will claim there has been NO VIABLE alternatives to socialized medicine. Not because there is no alternative, but because the alternatives take POWER away from Washington and the central planners. If providing better medical care were the goal, then why would the completely socialized VA medical system be such a monumental failure? It's true that vets say when they get care its excellent care. But how many vets have to travel for hours, passing by doctors & hospitals, because they can only get coverage at the designated socialized medicine services location? How much sense does it make to have vets bypass care facilities and force them to only see government employee medical providers? If the system is so good, just hold on. It's coming to your neighborhood. Your medical provider probably WON'T be in your neighborhood though. But, hey, just like the vets, your care will be excellent. When you can get it. Where you can get it is the question. Every example of socialized medicine, both the VA here and in countries around the world, shows what a monumental failure socialism truly is. Worse care not better. More expensive not less. Care to provide proof other wise? Try it. We won't hold our collective breath waiting for you though. (how's that? pretty creative?! using 'collective' in that sentence?! figured it was directed at libs, collective was the right choice.)
