What the AP reported yesterday was not news to all of us who have attempted to survive on wages far below the federal poverty line:
Sandra Pico is poor, but not poor enough.
She makes about $15,000 a year, supporting her daughter and unemployed husband. She thought she'd be able to get health insurance after the Supreme Court upheld President Barack Obama's health care law.
Then she heard that her own governor won't agree to the federal plan to extend Medicaid coverage to people like her in two years. So she expects to remain uninsured, struggling to pay for her blood pressure medicine.
When I was
working as a reporter for a small town newspaper, I was trying to support three children (now aged 13,11 and 9), pay my mortgage and other utilities and services, buy clothes for all us, purchase school supplies, pay for kids' activities, buy gas and keep my truck running, and afford a few luxuries (like presents when the kids had a birthday - or attended a friend's birthday party - or Christmas) on $12 an hour. While I was poor enough to receive about $400 a month in SNAP benefits and could put food on the table with that, I made far too much to qualify for Medicaid (for myself - my kids were covered).
(There's more below the squiggle...)
Like I said, I was working for a small-town paper; there were few opportunities for better paying jobs, much less any employers who offered benefits. And frankly, I loved what I did but that meant I went without health insurance.
While the AP article goes on to say:
Governors in those five states have said they'll reject the Medicaid expansion underpinning Obama's health law after the Supreme Court's decision gave states that option. They favor small government and say they can't afford the added cost to their states even if it's delayed by several years. Some states estimate the expansion could ultimately cost them a billion dollars a year or more.
Many of the people affected by the decision are working parents who are poor — but not poor enough — to qualify for Medicaid.
It fails to mention that current federal guidelines prevent many working adults trying to survive well below the poverty line from getting Medicaid. That was my case and it remains the situation for tens of millions of Americans.
For those Americans -- and many, many more -- the situation would deeply worsen under a Romney presidency, as the AP article notes:
Republican Mitt Romney's new running mate, conservative Wisconsin congressman Paul Ryan, has a budget plan that would turn Medicaid over to the states and sharply limit federal dollars. Romney hasn't specifically said where he stands on Ryan's idea, but has expressed broad support for his vice presidential pick's proposals.
Medicaid now covers an estimated 70 million Americans and would cover an estimated 7 million more in 2014 under the Obama health law's expansion. In contrast, Ryan's plan could mean 14 million to 27 million Americans would ultimately lose coverage, even beyond the effect of a repeal of the health law, according to an analysis by the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation of Ryan's 2011 budget plan.
Even if Romney loses (which, thankfully,
looks to be the case), those Republican governors have pandered to the Teabaggers --
at the expense of the working poor in their states. They've opted to "preserve Liberty" (whatever that means) instead of looking out for the health and well being of millions of constituents.
Look, I was never a fan of Obamacare: I didn't think it went nearly as far as it should (I wanted a single-payer option, at least) and I thought their were too any concessions for the vultures in the Health Insurance industry. However, I knew that, if I could stick it out for a few year, I just might be able to afford health care.
Pretty fit for my age, my health care plan amounted to waiting for something catastrophic to happen and then take my sick ass to the emergency room. Then, after the bill came, do what millions and millions of Americans do: Stick it to the insured and the tax payers. I hated doing that (and feared for my credit rating should I have had to go through with that plan) but, on $12 an hour, there was no way I'd be able to pay anything extra every month for a medical bill that would most likely included a bottom line of 4-5 digits.
Fortunately, I recently married a teacher and, while her benefits aren't terrific, I can at least go to the doctor for preventative care, get that mole checked out, get a tooth pulled or whatever. I don't have to rely on my previous plan of sticking all of you with my medical bills.
It astounds me that the very same people who vacuously howl about "American Exceptionalism" are not concerned that our health care system resembles that of a third-world nation. It appalls me that they show zero compassion for the 60 million or so fellow Americans who are in the situation I was in. And while I've moved from Colorado (where Gov. Hickenlooper will most likely approve the Medicaid expansion) to Arizona, I might have coverage but the future is uncertain for hundreds of thousands of my new fellow residents.
This whole insane fight over bringing the U.S. into the 21st century with a healthcare system that covers all Americans reminds me of line by Joseph Heller in Catch-22: “Mankind is resilient: the atrocities that horrified us a week ago become acceptable tomorrow.”
Cross-posted at The Firebird Suite where I blog about parenting, politics, music, AZ insanity and pretty much anything stuck in my craw at the moment.