Repealing the ACA under Trump

[knapplc]

 

Quote

 

72 Percent of All Rural Hospital Closures Are in States That Rejected the Medicaid Expansion

Roughly 20 percent of Americans live in rural areas, including more than 13 million children, according to the last U.S. census. And, according to research and reporting by the Pittsburg Morning Sun and its parent company, GateHouse Media, those people have been steadily losing access to hospitals for years.

 

In Oklahoma, Georgia, South Carolina, and Mississippi, at least 52 percent of all rural hospitals spent more money than they made between 2011 to 2017. In Kansas, it's 64 percent, and five hospitals there shut down completely in that time. Since 2010, 106 rural hospitals have closed across the country. (Another 700 are "on shaky ground," and about 200 are "on the verge of collapse," according to Gatehouse.) Of those 106 that closed, 77 were in deep red states where local politicians refused the Obama administration's Medicaid expansion that came about as a result of the Affordable Care Act.

 

In short, the federal government provided funds to expand coverage for Medicaid, a program that helps pay for health care for low income patients. But the expansion was optional, and 14 Republican-controlled states rejected to take the money. The only state that bucked this trend was Utah, where rural hospitals were among the most profitable in the country thanks to a policy of shifting funds and resources from urban hospitals. Only 14 percent of rural hospitals operated at a loss and none shut down over the same time period.

 

 

[Danny Bateman]

2 hours ago, knapplc said:

 

 

 

To make it painstakingly simple, the federal government offered what amounted to free money to states to help provide healthcare to people.

 

Republicans rejected it out of spite. And now it's hurting Americans living in their states.

[BigRedBuster]

1 hour ago, Danny Bateman said:

 

To make it painstakingly simple, the federal government offered what amounted to free money to states to help provide healthcare to people.

 

Republicans rejected it out of spite. And now it's hurting Americans living in their states.

Ok....I think it’s stupid states like Nebraska refused to expand Medicaid. 

 

However, it’s not free money. Someone is paying taxes to cover it. 

[Danny Bateman]

18 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Ok....I think it’s stupid states like Nebraska refused to expand Medicaid.  

 

However, it’s not free money. Someone is paying taxes to cover it.  

 

Well, yeah, in that sense it's not free. It still comes out of the federal budget.

 

But it was money the feds were literally handing right over to the states. All they had to do was accept it. The federal government would cover 90% of the cost of expanding Medicaid for the states.

 

Still, they said no. Because socialism or some such.

[Moiraine]

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

Ok....I think it’s stupid states like Nebraska refused to expand Medicaid. 

 

However, it’s not free money. Someone is paying taxes to cover it. 

 

 

The funny thing is, a lot of that money for the states that refused was going to be coming from high population/high wealth left leaning states like California and New York. The states with lower total wealth would've been the big winners.

 

The saddest thing about the ACA to me is it wasn't given a fair shot. The Republicans wanted it to fail because they didn't want Obama or the Democrats to get a win. It was by no means perfect but it could have been better and it could have been improved. Instead they just took a giant s#!t on it. The Republican states not expanding medicaid for purely political reasons was just one part of that.

[Danny Bateman]

36 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

The funny thing is, a lot of that money for the states that refused was going to be coming from high population/high wealth left leaning states like California and New York. The states with lower total wealth would've been the big winners.

 

The saddest thing about the ACA to me is it wasn't given a fair shot. The Republicans wanted it to fail because they didn't want Obama or the Democrats to get a win. It was by no means perfect but it could have been better and it could have been improved. Instead they just took a giant s#!t on it. The Republican states not expanding medicaid for purely political reasons was just one part of that. 

 

Personally I think the justification for the current lawsuit seeking to invalidate the entire ACA - that when you repeal one part of a law all of it must then be struck down - is dumb as hell, but I am not a lawyer. Perhaps @QMany or @84HuskerLaw can provide more perspective as to what's likely to happen.

 

But a lot hinges on the outcome of that lawsuit. If it fails and the ACA remains, we can continue having a debate about adding a public option vs. full-blown M4A. If it succeeds, I can't imagine undoing our entire healthcare system is a winning issue for Republicans in an election year. They could barely cobble together a coherent alternative when they controlled all branches of government. Now they'd have to come up with one Nancy Pelosi and a Democratic House would sign off on. Spearheaded by Donald Trump.

 

A lot of potential for that to blow up in their faces.

 

I think if that happens, it's the green light for Dems to just go ahead and unify behind M4A. If we're starting from scratch we might as well do it right.

[Ulty]

6 hours ago, Danny Bateman said:

Perhaps ... @84HuskerLaw can provide more perspective 

 

[QMany]

7 hours ago, Danny Bateman said:

Personally I think the justification for the current lawsuit seeking to invalidate the entire ACA - that when you repeal one part of a law all of it must then be struck down - is dumb as hell, but I am not a lawyer. Perhaps @QMany or ... can provide more perspective as to what's likely to happen.

I haven't reviewed the merits of the current litigation, but that likely won't matter if it gets to SCOTUS.