Yes, this is a life or death issue. And those who have kept these medicaid
dollars from coming to Utahns in need of them will be at least, at least,
partially responsible for any deaths occasioned by these measures.
Moreover, as individuals expire for lack of care, their cases must be
documented. The far right has been trying to destroy the statistical apparatus
of the federal and state governments for years. The hope of the far right is
that people who die for lack of care will die anonymously and unaccounted for.
This must not happen.
There are other ways to handle this (besides expanding medicare).I
don't think the right is saying "just let them die". They are
saying there's another way. The other way doesn't tie us to a
temporary flood of Washington money which is scheduled to go away over time...
when it goes away... how do you replace it?I think they are taking
the best course for the long view. Of course it is attractive to just take the
flood of Federal dollars now... but what do you do when they go away?IMO... We need to help each other. And contribute to charitable institutions
that help the poor get healthcare. Put together a system run and funded by
Utah (not the Feds), which we can sustain long term... not just while the
Federal money is flowing to get more people onto the Federally funded
entitlement programs (with hooks attached) that will eventually lose their
federal funds and the State left holding the empty bag and required to maintain
the level of funding these entitlement programs enjoyed during the brief period
where Obama was sending us tons of money.
Heart-wrenching. But here's another good reason why I will never again be a
Republican. Can't feel good about being an active Mormon and a member of
the GOP. WWJD? Certainly not what the Republican legislature and Governor
Herbert are doing.
Ford DeTreese,You brought it up... the WWJD approach to politics.So what would Jesus do?Would he expand medicare and expect the
government to take care of the poor... or would he do it himself, and encourage
his followers to take care of the poor (instead of expecting the Government to
make it so he didn't have to think about it)?Utah's plan
may be closer to what he would do... not expect fed entitlements to do it for
him.===I don't think Jesus would oppose taking the
federal $$$ lure to expand Medicare. But he would not be opposed to the other
solution either.It's not the all-or-nothing proposition you
pretend. Meaning... if you decide to not take the money, you want people to
die. It means you have ANOTHER solution!People won't die if
we don't take the temp Fed money. Because we have a different solution
(which doesn't include letting everybody die).This
all-or-nothing mentality some have (you either take the money... or you want
people to die)... is partisan nonsense. There ARE other solutions (that
don't require just letting people die).
Based on his own words, Jesus would have let Caesar do Caesar's work, which
in our day means "providing for the general welfare." He surely
didn't and wouldn't stand in Caesar's way.
If we're really interested in closing these gaps maybe we should consider
some sort of system that provides coverage for, and the cost of which is paid
@2 bits -- It's lovely to think that we will all contribute thousands of
dollars to help care for the poor, but what happens when we don't. Or what
happens if you contribute a hundred thousand for your neighbor's cancer
treatment, but I, evil liberal that I am, only want to contribute $20 to help my
neighbor with her cancer treatment. Do we want to live in a society where one
person who happens to live by generous people is helped but other, equally
deserving people are not helped because they know the wrong people? Although it
is difficult for a conservative to hear, this is a task most efficiently
performed by government. (And by government, I mean US through our elected
representatives making laws that benefit society.)
This is only "life or death" IF you are an all-or-nothing type
radical.Neither solution has to result in death. Only the extremes
of either solution.There WILL be death... even if we expand
Medicare. It's part of the "human condition" we are all subject
too.I think either solution CAN work. And it doesn't have to
be presented as a "life or death" decision.