The Second Opinion

The biggest mistake giving the states 100% reimbursement for Medicaid (for those below the poverty line) the first few years and then only 90% beginning in 2020.

That would have created a hardship for many state budgets.

When the Supreme Court ruled that states could elect NOT to fund the Medicaid expansion but they like, Republicans and other opponents did exactly what you’d expected they’d do. So far 21 states have decided not to participate and 6 are on the bubble.

Poor people below 100% of the poverty line are out of luck.

We should have passed Medicare for All rather than allowing insurance companies to make billions are middlemen. But failing that, Obama should have had the federal government cover 100% of the cost forever. Not doing that either was going to hurt some states OR as it turned out, allow opponents in some state to not cover the poor.

This is shameful (for both sides).

#1 Posted by William Du Bois, CJR on Tue 30 Jul 2013 at 03:32 PM

It should be noted that the Center for Advancing Health seems to funded by the usual pro-corporate suspects promoting the tired trope that individual choice [neoliberalism] will set us free:

"While advances in medical knowledge have been responsible for steady increases in the length and quality of life of Americans [unless you're black or poor], the potential of health care to improve individual and population health in the future rests increasingly in the hands of individuals. Whether we are sick or well, we will not benefit from the expertise of health professionals and the technologies they deploy unless we participate actively and knowledgably in our own care."

http://www.cfah.org/about/funders

Well, I guess we get these neoliberal solutions with Obamacare; we get fake choices, fake free markets, corporate welfare, and we are tricked into bickering amongst ourselves when the inevitable bad results hit. After the corporate terrorists come for health care the only targets left will be public education and Social Security/retirement benefits.

Why won't our corporate press discuss the obvious benefits of socialized health care and/or single payer health care and why oh why are we subjected to this propaganda about "individual choice?" Just try wading through the various policies and changes described in the two parts in this series! It's a mess (not necessarily the writer's doing) and the obfuscation hides the real agenda. . . austerity, privatization, and corporate welfare!

#2 Posted by Walter W., CJR on Tue 30 Jul 2013 at 04:59 PM

I live in Massahusetts.I have Medicare and a B/C B/S supplement. I recently found out why my doctor no longer give checkups, questions what other doctors suggested my primary physician do, but having her tell me it was up to me to make that decision. I was having a UTI that was not attended to properly, and after a bad episode, I was again on antibiotics. An article I read explained that doctors make more money if their patients can reduce the costs of treatments, and office visits should be kept to five minutes up to twenty minutes. What ever happened to PREVENTIVE MEDICINE? It seems the answer to medicare problems is a "do it yourself."

#3 Posted by Bunni Roberts, CJR on Wed 31 Jul 2013 at 08:18 PM