+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 2 of 2

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2005

    The poor and CHILDREN get hurt again

    Budget to Hurt Poor People on Medicaid, Report Says

    WASHINGTON, Jan. 29 Millions of low-income people would have to pay more for health care under a bill worked out by Congress, and some of them would forgo care or drop out of Medicaid because of the higher co-payments and premiums, the Congressional Budget Office says in a new report.

    The Senate has already approved the measure, the first major effort to rein in federal benefit programs in eight years, and the House is expected to vote Wednesday, clearing the bill for President Bush.

    In his State of the Union address on Tuesday, Mr. Bush plans to recommend a variety of steps to help people obtain health insurance and cope with rising health costs. But the bill, the Deficit Reduction Act, written by Congress over the last year with support from the White House, could reduce coverage and increase the number of uninsured, the budget office said.

    Over all, the bill is estimated to save $38.8 billion in the next five years and $99.3 billion from 2006 to 2015, with cuts in student loans, crop subsidies and many other programs, the budget office said. Medicaid and Medicare account for half of the savings, 27 percent and 23 percent over 10 years.

    The report gives Democrats new ammunition to attack the bill. But they appear unlikely to defeat it, since the House approved a nearly identical version of the legislation by a vote of 212 to 206 on Dec. 19.

    Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, said the bill was needed because Medicaid had been growing at an unsustainable rate.

    But Senator Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico, said the budget office report confirmed that the bill would "cut access to care for some of our most vulnerable citizens."

    The bill gives states sweeping new authority to charge premiums and co-payments under Medicaid.

    "In response to the new premiums, some beneficiaries would not apply for Medicaid, would leave the program or would become ineligible due to nonpayment," the Congressional Budget Office said in its report, completed Friday night. "C.B.O. estimates that about 45,000 enrollees would lose coverage in fiscal year 2010 and that 65,000 would lose coverage in fiscal year 2015 because of the imposition of premiums. About 60 percent of those losing coverage would be children."

    The budget office predicted that 13 million low-income people, about a fifth of Medicaid recipients, would face new or higher co-payments for medical services like doctor's visits and hospital care.

    It said that by 2010 about 13 million low-income people would have to pay more for prescription drugs, and that this number would rise to 20 million by 2015.

    "About one-third of those affected would be children, and almost half would be individuals with income below the poverty level," the report said in addressing co-payments for prescription drugs.

    Under the bill, states could end Medicaid coverage for people who failed to pay premiums for 60 days or more. Doctors and hospitals could deny services to Medicaid beneficiaries who did not make the required co-payments.

    The budget office said the new co-payments would save money by reducing the use of medical services.

    "About 80 percent of the savings from higher cost-sharing would be due to decreased use of services," the report said.

    The official estimates take into account the fact that "savings from the reduced use of certain services could be partly offset by higher spending in other areas, such as emergency room visits."

    After talking to federal and state officials and reviewing Medicaid data, analysts at the Congressional Budget Office predicted that states would charge premiums to 1.3 million low-income people and cut benefits for 1.6 million people. Most of the cuts would affect dental, vision and mental health services, it said.

    The bill also makes it more difficult for people to qualify for Medicaid coverage of nursing home care by transferring assets to children or other relatives for less than fair market value.

    This provision would delay Medicaid eligibility for 120,000 people, or about 15 percent of the new recipients of Medicaid nursing home benefits each year, the budget office said.

    Under another provision of the bill, Medicaid would deny coverage of nursing home care to any person with home equity exceeding $500,000. States could increase the ceiling to $750,000. About 2,000 people a year would be denied nursing home benefits because of the cap on home equity, the budget office said.

    Taken together, these provisions, requiring people to use more of their own assets to pay for nursing home care, are expected to save the federal government $6.4 billion over 10 years.

    The budget office estimated that 35,000 Medicaid recipients would lose coverage because of new, more stringent requirements for them to prove United States citizenship. Most of those losing coverage would be illegal immigrants, but some would be citizens unable to supply the necessary documents, the report said.

    Other provisions of the bill would establish stricter work requirements for welfare recipients and cut federal payments to the states for enforcing child support orders. The cut would save the federal government $4.1 billion over 10 years, but child support collections would decline as a result, the budget office said.


  2. #2
    coontie is offline Vashudeva; Ferryman - doing the work...
    Join Date
    Jul 2005

    Re: The poor and CHILDREN get hurt again

    Why should anyone expect these Senators and Congress persons to
    care or be concerned about the plight of anyone regarding the Medicare,
    Medicade and Prescription Drug Programs when these same individuals
    are well covered by OTHER government provided benfits, wherein they
    don't have to worry or be concerned about Hospital Bills, Prescription
    Drugs or Nursing Home Care?

    After all, they are not even included in the Social Security System,
    which is stil mandatory for all other workers. Wasn't for Civil Service
    workers until the early '80's when they put them on the system, at no
    choice. Wanted to try and take in more money to steal out of the
    trust fund to use for their own purposes, somewhere else.

    Now, if you are a Lobbyists for the Medical, Presription Drug Industries
    (yes, Industries), any other big corporation, industry, banking, insurance;
    why certainly. Come right in sit down and I will listen and respond
    howeever I can to ACCOMODATE you.

    By the way, I will be up for reelection in ----, think you can see you way
    "contributing" some money for my reelection campaign, huhhhhh? Also, if
    I don't make it, think you have a CEO or other top executive position
    that would be available that you can hire me into?

    By the way, how many saw the National Geographic Channel special on the
    Challanger disaster that was aired just recently?

    Interesting that no one from NASA or Thikol Chemical ever went to
    prison for the murder of the seven Astronauts. THe Thikol Chemical
    people knew that the rocket booster o-rings would not seal effectively
    at low tempertures that was present on the day of the launch.
    Two of the senior engineers on the project fought to the last minute
    to scrub the launch stating that to attempt to launch under the
    circumstances would have been disastrous.

    They were over ridden by their superiors at Thikol and the launch went
    ahead with the anticipated disatrous results. One of the two engineers
    was told to leave Thikol. THe NASA "offical" that made the final decision
    to launch could plainly, obviously see that there was contention,
    disagreement, a serious problem with all the Thikol people being in
    agreement, but shirked his responsibility by saying, in so many words,
    after the senior Thikol people said to go ahead with the launch, his
    attitude, manner was: okay, if you say so.

    The seven Astronauts were just doomed people from the beginning and
    didn't realize that there life was meaningless in comparison to the
    consideration of money spent and the reputation of Thikol Chemical
    Company. Thikol still has government contracts and is still connected
    actively to NASA and the space program.

    Anyone have a burning desire to die a terrible death? Well, you may
    volunteer for NASA and the space program. They may possibly accomodate

Similar Threads

  1. How Poor Countries Remain Poor
    By conserv4ever in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 12-22-2016, 09:37 PM
  2. Obama Policies Hurt the Struggling Poor
    By conserv4ever in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 06-18-2014, 01:40 AM
  3. Smile, it wont hurt ya
    By Old Timer in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 11-23-2009, 04:07 AM
  4. What We Don't know WILL Hurt Us.
    By sojustask in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 02-24-2009, 09:36 PM
  5. I.R.S. Move Said to Hurt the Poor
    By sojustask in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-12-2006, 12:35 AM

Tags for this Thread

Add / Edit Tags

View Tag Cloud



Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts