The problem is that the healthcare, insurance, and pharmaceutical corporations
have used their influence on policy makers for too long and the entire system is
broken. Having uninsured people dependant on emergency care rather than
preventive and office care and reasonable prescription costs costs us all
double, triple or more because many can't afford to pay that emergency bill
so it gets passed through to other sources of revenue. It would serve the health
care and pharmaceutical industry right if the government just nationalized the
whole system. Their bottom line mentality would go into seizures.
@VST "According to Reagan, Medicare would lead federal officials
to dictate where physicians could practice medicine, and open the door to
government control over where Americans were allowed to live. In fact, Reagan
warned that if Medicare became law, there was a real possibility that the
federal government would control where Americans go and what they do for a
living. ""1935: Almost all Republicans in Congress oppose
the creation of Social Security.1939: 75percent of Republicans in
Senate try to kill legislation providing Social Security benefits to dependents
and survivors as well as retired workers.1950: 79 percent of House
and 89 percent of Senate Republicans vote against disability insurance to defeat
it.1956: 86 percent of Republicans in Senate oppose disability
insurance; program approved nonetheless.1965: 93 percent of
Republicans in House and 62 percent in Senate vote to kill Medicare."
"Utah receives 70 percent of the program's costs from Washington, D.C.
The remaining 30 percent is picked up by state dollars"Where
does the state think that this "free" federal money is coming from. The
money will come from Utah taxpayers, and taxpayers of every other state, in
increased federal taxes. If Every state is being promised that 70 percent of
their program will be picked by the federal government, it can only mean a tax
increase nation-wide to pay for the program. Or maybe they'll just print
more money to pay for it, further devaluing the dollar and passing the bill on
to future generations.Throw money at a problem and costs will only
We need to abandon medicaid, and all private insurance, for a single payer
health care system.
Please, Governor Herbert! Accept the Medicaid Expansion!
President Obama could find the cure to lung cancer and Republicans would all
start smoking just to spite him.
I find it interesting that three years out of four, republicans rail against
Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, and any other "entitlement
programs" that taxpayers pay into and expect a return from. Then election
year hits and they want to position themselves as staunch defenders of these
very same programs they have vilified as if no one will remember the previous
three years. The sad thing is that it works. Republicans, be open and
honest about your positions. You have opposed Medicare since Reagan railed
against it in 1964. You have opposed Medicaid and Social Security since its
inception. You opposed TARP, SNAP, and Affirmative Action from the beginning.
Senator Mike Lee was right - stop hiding your positions and talk more openly and
freely about what you believe. I'll be sitting over here with my coffee
watching the show.
Don't do it. It will cost the state money. It will drain you. It is a
poison. Join other states in encouraging congress to not fund this illegal law.
Don't get sucked in my the illusory lure of "FREE MONEY!" if we
just shackle our future to the mandates of Obamacare. Remember, even Democrats
are now admitting it is a train wreck, and the drastically higher costs than
predicted, or were currently paid by consumers are just beginning to be felt.Stay far, far away from this mess if we can!
The longer they take the more unnecessary suffering there will be. Is this delay
really about being careful or is it more about political stonewalling? 45 other
states have already made a decision, with most deciding that the benefits of
Medicaid expansion easily outweigh any negative consequences. Is it about
flexibility or is it about finding some kind of poison pill that will make it
look like the state is doing something, but that will in the end become a
justification for killing the expansion? This notion may seem cynical but
Republican poison pill politics has become much more common in recent years.
Just ask the Post Office.