Reply to Your thoughts on likelihood of rolling back SS, Medicaid, Medicare after first week

Forum Index » Eldercare

Reply to "Your thoughts on likelihood of rolling back SS, Medicaid, Medicare after first week"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Zero chance. And social security won’t be taxed. [/quote]

You think there is ZERO chance in the roll back of SS, Medicaid, and Medicare? What is your provenance of this confidence?[/quote]

Medicaid is DEFINITELY going to be rolled back.

Here's a good explanation of what different buzz words will really mean:

https://pnhp.org/news/critiquing-project-2025-medicaid/

[quote]As for understanding Project 2025’s Medicaid policy agenda, let me cut to the chase. The proposed changes, despite being couched in bureaucratic buzzwords, have a straightforward and nefarious intent: Reduce health insurance coverage for the poor, by restricting both eligibility and benefits. And, equally worrisome, use Medicaid to suppress access to abortion.

Here’s the translation of Project 2025 policy jargon:

A [b]“balanced or blended match rate[/b]” means less federal money (currently the majority of Medicaid funding), imposing a larger financial toll on states and thus lowering overall funding. “Block grants” and “caps” means fixed funding, regardless of the size of eligible populations and their medical needs, and slow or no growth over time. “End state financing loopholes”, “reform payments”, and (again) “replace enhanced match rate” all mean: lower federal contributions. All this compromises providing care, see analyses here, here, and here.

“[b]Improve Medicaid eligibility standards[/b] to protect those in need” means: cover only the very poorest and sickest, leaving out many who currently qualify and who, in today’s fragile health insurance environment, desperately need Medicaid.

“[b]Incentivize personal responsibility[/b]” means – impose often onerous preconditions on getting Medicaid benefits. The example, “implement work requirements” — which don’t work.

“[b]Allow private insurance[/b]” means abandoning the Medicaid public structure in favor of private insurance, which results in widespread under-insurance – especially dangerous for the poor.

“[b]Eliminate … benefit requirements[/b]” means, well, removing requirements for specific medical services, thereby increasing risk.

“[b]Redesign … long-term care[/b]” means – undercut the mainstay of long-term care funding for the poor and middle class.

Layered onto this broad reduction in medical benefits is a full-bore attack on abortion services. I don’t think I need to translate the language excerpted above, which is atypically clear and direct. More on this topic in an upcoming post.

What’s amazing about Project 2025 is the ability to rhetorically cast dangerous policies as being about efficiency, generosity to the sickest, and personal virtue. In contrast, we know that true efficiency and generosity are available in true universal health insurance – single payer. The security of excellent health care access will go a long way toward increasing societal virtue.

* As I’ve written previously, I very much look forward to the day when the phrase “health insurance for the poor” no longer has meaning. Meantime … we must maintain the program that provides for the medical needs of the economically vulnerable.

https://healthjusticemonitor.org…

[/quote][/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics