Skip to main content

View Diary: OH SNAP! The Smackdown Will Commence Shortly (175 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  'Deprives poor to make political football (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Alice Olson, Brooke In Seattle

    out of access to health care.'

    That's how I read this current development.

    Maybe I'm not getting what this diary says, so Here's my synopsis:

    1. Used to be (until when? date, decision maker(s)?) that citizens of  OptOut states (ie Red states) could reach through their state's nullifcation of the ACA law and still get coverage from th eFederal level, just by signing up.

    2. Somebody made a decision and implemented it.  That decision includes allowing the ACA's nullification by Red states effective -- actually puts that nullification into effect.

    3. Now, Red State poor folks, who could have had health care, can't get health care unless they become political activists who can (1) badger their Red state govt to change their vote or (2) elect Blue state govt .

    Frankly, I think this idea sucks -- and I don't use that language much.

    Poor folks ALL OVER AMERICA need health care.  These Poor Folks have enough troubles already; so now the Democrats are going to add to their burdens by making them responsible for changing the unchangeable minds of Red, ALEC-led state legislators/governors?

    Whoever made this decision, and anybody who participates in implementing in it, is working to deny Poor Folks the protection offered to ALL CITIZENS by a Federal law, as well as imposing a 'tax' one them by requiring them to take PARTISAN POLITICAL ACTION in the vain hope that they can change the minds, or the persons, of their Red state government.

    I am one of the millions of people whose state government has nullified the ACA.  I have been looking forward to the moment when I could sign up for health care under the ACA.  Now you tell me that, in order to even have the remote possibility of getting ACA coverage someday, I have to undertake political action that I have neither the physical capabilities nor the financial resources to do.

    And speaking of 'unintended consequences' -- don't you think that the GOP will make predictable political hay out of this decision?  This decision gives the GOP grounds to truthfully say to the millions of people like me:  'See, you were fools to believe the Democrats/Obama all along.  They're not gonna give you health care -- it was all a bait-and-switch to get you to vote for them.  They promised you something and now they're not gonna deliver unless you work for them!'

    Ad, btw, what does the ACA law actually say about availability coverage for all citizens?  Does the ACA itself allow this kind of deprivation of protection based on where a (poor) person lives?  Does this decision comply with the letter of the law?

    This is a stupid, stupid, stupid idea and will only work to impose even greater hardship on to every people it was intended to serve.

    •  The nullification happened with the SCOTUS (2+ / 0-)

      decision this past year on ACA's constitutionality. So

      Whoever made this decision, and anybody who participates in implementing in it, is working to deny Poor Folks the protection offered to ALL CITIZENS by a Federal law
      That would be SCOTUS, whose decision last year enabled states to opt out of the Medicaid Expansion. That was NOT in the original law passed by congress.

      This is now the only option left if we are going to try to ensure that working poor get health coverage.

      •  Per official ACA site's webchat (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mdmslle

        I was told:

        If your state is not going to expand Medicaid coverage, you will be able to get coverage through the Marketplace.
        I begin to wonder about that HuffPo piece.  More on that in a bit.
        •  Left msg with ACA site's webchat (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mdmslle

          That HuffPo article is certainly a confusing read.  It starts of with the Federal government informing them tnat the Federal govt allows them to get coverage (while blaming Red state politicians).

          When Americans begin shopping for benefits on the law's health insurance exchanges on Oct. 1, the people who would qualify for Medicaid but live in the 20-plus states where Republican governors or state legislators won't approve the expansion will see a note explaining that federal law allows them to get coverage that their states' leaders won't provide them.
          Then a lot of gobbeldegook (and I'm a pretty good reader), ending up with a sentence that I sent to the healthcare.cov chatline.  Here's that conversation:
          [4:23:23 pm]: Welcome! You're now connected to Health Insurance Marketplace Live Chat.

          Thanks for contacting us. My name is Rep [I changed this for privacy]. To protect your privacy, please don't provide any personal information, like Social Security Number, or any other sensitive medical or personal information.

          [4:23:48 pm]: Rep
          Welcome to the Health Insurance Marketplace call center, my name is Jourdan, how may I help you?

          [4:24:40 pm]: CALLER
          An online article is creating confusion.  Is this quote accurate?  "The health care reform law creates health insurance tax credits for people at the poverty line up to four times the poverty line -- but not below it. This means that those earning less than the poverty level -- $11,490 for an individual this year -- won't have access to these subsidies or Medicaid if their home states don't expand the program. "  This article gives the impression that people balow the poverty line can't get health coverage through ACA.  Is this correct?  If not, what is the actual situation?

          [4:27:13 pm]: Rep
          I do apologize for the inconvenience, unfortunately we do not have information available at this time to help answer your question specifically.Due to the nature of your question, I am going to refer your issue to an Advanced Resolution Center specialist, who will research it and call you back within two business days.

          [4:27:52 pm]: Rep
          Can I please gather your first and last name, phone number and the best time to reach you ?

          [4:29:51 pm]: CALLER
          Thank you.  Please provide the specialist with the link to the article, which may require further clairfication: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...   I would prefer that you respond to my email:  

          So, I'll let you know what I learn from healthcaer.gov

          I also went back to your diary to read it more closely.  You write that Enroll American is going to train and send out teams to inform people -- particularly those who will be using the exchanges -- about what they can do under ACA laws.  Then:

          I spoke with someone at Enroll America and learned this is going to be implemented in every state. Their focus is on those who will be purchasing insurance on the exchange, not those who would be served by the Medicaid Expansion but I'm working hard to create an alliance with them so that those who discover they cannot get coverage (because of a state's opting out) have the phone numbers of their idiot GOP representatives to call ad nauseum and tools to let their friends and family know exactly what is going on. To reinforce that "note" the President will be sending them and give them something to DO ABOUT IT.
          I'm feeling my way here, but it looks to me like the ACA will cover the people who 'would be served by the Medicaid expansion', even in the Red OptOut states.  If that's the case, then you'll be talking to people who can get ACA coverage even though their Red state has opted out.

          And if that's the case, and you want to do political activism around it, it would make better sense (imo) to promote Dem candidate and assist with voter registration/polling place access than to make poor people spend their time, money and phone minutes calling Red elected officials.  And see if you can get the Democratic party to raise up some worthwhile candidates in every district for 2014, so people have a viable Dem to choose.

          •  So to clarify this a bit for you: (0+ / 0-)

            The expansion would raise the eligibility for Medicaid from where the federal poverty standard is now to 138% of that.

            So for a single person now to qualify for Medicaid their HH income is limited to $11,xxx. Under the expansion it would be $15,5xx.

            For a family of two, right now Medicaid eligibility say Federal poverty level of $15,xxx. Under the expansion it would be $21,xxx.

            Adding to the eligibility complexity pre-expansion is that in most states, in addition to the very low income requirements, to be eligible for Medicaid you also have to be disabled and/or have dependents. Under The expansion those things don't factor in. So a single able bodied childless man who only earns 13,000 a year would be eligible for the first time ever. I have friends with diabetes who could've used this coverage before losing their toes.

            Now if your state does accept the expansion you can still try shopping for insurance on the exchange but it won't be free like Medicaid would have and the cost may be too much for someone with such low income.

          •  Oh and yes the electoral element is absolutely (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            CroneWit, Calamity Jean, Tam in CA

            Part of our game plan, being that we're a business focused on state and local politics.

            But first we're going to try to get people insurance. That's the most important thing.

            But for those idiot GOPers who don't change their minds, we'll be working closely with Dems on the ground to help them run strong candidates using AcA as a bludgeon. For sure. And in fact even they do change their minds, we'll still use it because it shows the GOP wi not look out for you if they think they can get away with it.

            •  You're a 'we' - what business are you? (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              mdmslle

              Maybe you've explained that elsewhere, but in this post you come off as an individual.  I think we readers have the right to know that you are dong a job here, not just writing as a person.

              •  I've been around here for 7 years. I'm an (0+ / 0-)

                Individual and I also own a business. I have written a out it here and people are well aware of it. I'm not promoting anything related to my business in this diary. Just solid information.

                You're user 109xxx.  I'm 150xxx. You are well aware of how to learn more about me and what I'm about. Knock yourself out. But fwiw I'm a part of this community and have been for years. Go look.

                •  Geez, jump back! (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  mdmslle

                  You wrote:

                  Part of our game plan, being that we're a business focused on state and local politics.
                  Which is not quite the same as your profile:
                  provocateur, artisan, rebel, dreamer, doer.
                  Occupation: media
                   
                  And there's no website (personal or business) in your profile, and I have no way to google your business to find out what it is.

                  You know, with the same amount of time and keystrokes you could have said, 'My partners and I have This Business in MD, where we work on X'.

                  But the fact is, You (plural) are a business that focuses on state/local politics AND you have posted a diary here presenting an activist opportunity for Kossites WITHOUT TELLING THEM about your business involvement.

                  A friendly little announcement, at the top of the diary, maybe with a link to a previous diary in which you described your business, would have done the job of 'Full Disclosure'.

                  And even when asked, you don't identify your political business in a diary about a political action that you have suggested to the people who are going to roll out ACA locally.   Dubious, imo.

                  •  You can easily see my diary history. My (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    CroneWit, ladybug53

                    Business not being listed in my profile is because I didn't join this site to promote my business (and in fact the business is a new one). Nor do I stick around here as a matter of business. It's not my focus or reason to be here at dkos and never will be.

                    You can see my business here http://boldbluemedia.com
                    Here's my Facebook page if you're up on FB
                    Http:/Facebook.com/boldbluemediaalliance

                    I publish a monthly magazine focused on state and local democratic and progressive politics which you an access a sample of and information about from the website or from this link
                    Http:/boldbluemagazine.com

                    Our official launch was July 1, 2013.

                    I introduced the idea here in early May. We (my husband and I who are the only employees of this startup right now) got a warm reception.

                    Since then I've been a bit less frequent here. Running this thing with two people is a full time job for 10 people but this is my Internet family where people know me and care about me and I know and care about them.

                    I hope this is enough info for you.

        •  Not confusing at all. Anyone can purchase on (0+ / 0-)

          The exchange. The thing is most of those who would qualify for the expanded Medicaid may not be able to afford it. That's why they implemented it.

          So someone with anHH income 138% of federal poverty level (eg family of 4 with HH income of 31,000/year) would get free care through Medicaid.

          As it stands if they're in a state that isn't expanding, yes, the can inquire about the exchanges but it won't be free.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site