A community of 30,000 US Transcriptionist serving Medical Transcription Industry
Medicaid Expansion
Posted: Jul 11, 2014
Reading many of these posts, I would think the majority of you, if asked, would claim to be Republicans or Conservatives. With this said, I assume that you would not support Medicaid Expansion. How do you resolve this with your own interests, i.e. hospitals staying open? I just saw an article that said that since Medicaid Expansion, Arizona hospitals are now "saving money." Arizona Hospital Association said that uncompensated care went down by 31%. Uncompensated care equals no paychecks for someone in the healthcare system and with the decisions being made in transcription choices, it could very well be us.
I have a friend who is working at our local state-owned University Hospital and she has seen many cuts in her department (they already outsourced their transcription) and the hospital is in serious economic difficulty partly because our state will not accept Medicaid Expansion.
The hospital I work for is a corporation and they have stated numerous times that the Medicaid Expansion issues is affecting many of their cost-cutting decisions.
;
Take a look at the VA. - NM
[ In Reply To ..]NM
Where is the Fed getting the money to give to the - States for programs like
[ In Reply To ..]this...from people paying taxes ... people living in States, or borrowed money that will eventually have to be paid back by people living in States.
So 100% of the money is coming from the States. The States are not getting any free money from the Federal government. They are getting their own money back.
So if they get Medicaid, why did they need - Obamacare? Most of the
[ In Reply To ..]people who signed up for Obamacare ended up on what is basically Medicaid anyway.
Medicaid reimburses doctors and hospitals less - than Medicare, 40% of doctors
[ In Reply To ..]don’t accept Medicaid patients.
It's Medicaid expansion under Obamacare. - The fed picks up 100%
[ In Reply To ..]of the additional costs for those Medicaid applicants who become eligible under the new rules of 138% of poverty levels for three years and 90% until 2022. Of course with the federal government bankrupt, there is no guarantee that the rules won't be changed if the feds don't have the money.
What they are finding under Obamacare is that the number of those enrolled under Medicaid has increased both under the old criteria and the new criteria. As a result of those who would have been covered without the expanded Obamacare criteria, the states must pick up about 50% of the costs as they do now for those covered under the old rules,
And guess what, the federal taxpayers pick up the tab. There is no free lunch.
Inmates gettign coverage under - Obamacare...
[ In Reply To ..]WASHINGTON – The Obama administration often touts that people with pre-existing conditions and countless others can now get covered under ObamaCare. But there's another group that's starting to benefit from the law -- prison inmates.
Cash-strapped state and local prisons increasingly are using the Affordable Care Act to pay for their inmates' medical costs, taking advantage of a little-known provision that lets them shift some of those expenses to the federal government.
Ohio, Illinois and Iowa are among the states trying to offload the rising costs of health care – which include mental health programs – by enrolling inmates into a new expanded Medicaid program when they get sick.
But it doesn't stop there. The states also are working to enroll them even before they're released from prison, so they have coverage when they get out.
Currently, 26 states and the District of Columbia are proceeding with a Medicaid expansion which allows them to extend medical coverage to single and childless adults. Jail operators in at least a half-dozen of those states are then, using that criteria, extending coverage to inmates. The shift means the federal government would pay some emergency costs that used to be entirely covered by the states and counties -- plus, inmates are starting to get coverage for when they leave.
Proponents of shifting prisoners into the expanded Medicaid -- in turn giving them access to health care, including mental health and rehab services, when they are released -- say this reduces recidivism. Others, though, argue that federal taxpayer dollars shouldn’t be used to foot the multibillion dollar bill.
“The political element of ObamCare is that we were helping what we called the deserving poor or what we used to call the deserving poor...
Medicaid is the single payer future Obama envisions for all of us.
Gitmo terrorists and illegals get free health care, too. - nm
[ In Reply To ..]NM
Are you saying that people in jail should be - denied medical care?
[ In Reply To ..]That's pretty selfish.
Who would you rather pay for, the Medicaid patient - above or a terrorist? nm
[ In Reply To ..]n/m
Didn't think the death squads were in place - do we really have to choose which ones to provide
[ In Reply To ..]nm
Geneva Convention does not apply to terriorts. - nm
[ In Reply To ..]nm
GENEVA CONVENTION - I think they are
[ In Reply To ..]This is in answer to whether Gitmo prisoners are included in Geneva Convention.
Apparently the DOD thinks they are.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2014/jun/06/will-us-have-close-guantanamo-once-afghanistan-war/
On September 6, 2006, the Department of Defense issued a department-wide directive applicable to all detainees in DOD custody or effective control. That directive incorporated verbatim CA3 of the Geneva Conventions and required the entire Department of Defense, including Guantanamo, to comply with CA3.
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2009/02/common-article-3-of-the-geneva-conventions-and-us-detainee-policy
CA3: Already in Force
From the military's point of view, Common Article 3 has been in full force for over two and a half years at Guantanamo. In June 2006, the United States Supreme Court ruled in the case of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld that America's armed conflict with al-Qaeda was non-international in character and, as such, was governed by CA3.[1] Within a week of that ruling, Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England issued a department-wide memorandum requiring all Department of Defense components to comply with CA3. Shortly thereafter, all components of the Department of Defense reported that they were in full compliance; this included the Joint Task Force in charge of detention operations at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
On September 6, 2006, the Department of Defense issued a department-wide directive applicable to all detainees in DOD custody or effective control. That directive incorporated verbatim CA3 of the Geneva Conventions and required the entire Department of Defense, including Guantanamo, to comply with CA3.
Whether this September 2006 directive marks the end of the story depends on what the text of CA3 means. And that is not so straightforward an inquiry.
Defining CA3
Common Article 3 is the third article common to each of the four Geneva Conventions. The Geneva Conventions codify much, albeit not all, of the law regulating armed conflict and the humane treatment of persons detained during armed conflict. The four conventions, as most recently revised and expanded in 1949, comprise a system of safeguards that attempt to regulate the ways wars are fought and to provide protections for individuals during wartime. The conventions themselves were a response to the horrific atrocities of World War II. The first convention covers soldiers wounded on the battlefield, the second covers sailors wounded and shipwrecked at sea, the third covers prisoners of war, and the fourth covers civilians taken by an enemy military or otherwise impacted.
What CA3 precisely requires and what it forbids is subject to debate. According to the actual language of CA 3, detainees "shall in all circumstances be treated humanely," but the term humanely is never defined. "[O]utrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment," are strictly prohibited, whatever they may be. Also prohibited are "cruel treatment and torture," but again, there is no definition of these terms. CA3 is a good statement of principles, but aside from banning murder and hostage-taking, it provides no concrete guidance to anyone actually holding detainees.
Is there is a distinction between prisoner and - terriorist? If not, I concede. NM
[ In Reply To ..]nm
That's tricky. We used to try terrorists by - military tribunals, but
[ In Reply To ..]now they are treated through the legal system (starting with Pres. Clinton).
HMMM? prisoner/terrorist? - me
[ In Reply To ..]I think in a military prison they are all prisoners. I think terrorists can be prisoners, but not all prisoners are terrorists--even at Gitmo, maybe. These guys were not apprehended, necessarily, in countries that we were at war with, maybe that is what would make them prisoners of war. So, these are terrorists that are imprisoned, but I still think the Geneva Convention applies because they are foreigners and they do not have the rights of an American citizen prisoner.
That sounds reasonable. - NM
[ In Reply To ..]nm
All people in jails aren't "terrorists." And I'm on - Medicaid, so yes, I'm for it.
[ In Reply To ..]And even when I had regular health ins. and a job, and was paying into Medicaid, I was for it. Because I had friends and relatives who were on it at various times. Who's to say YOU might not need it someday?
Medicaid Expansion-Support or Not - In reading the responses
[ In Reply To ..]I asked how you felt about the HOSPITALS cutting positions and (smaller community hospitals) possibly forced to close because of uncompensated patient care. I suppose this leads to the next question, do you think we should just boot them out and leave them to die in the streets? I realize someone is going to pay, and it is probably us, which is a cost of living in a civilized society. However, a capitalist society, without checks and balances, would strive towards everyone getting what they can afford and those that cannot...well....
Medicaid Expansion-Support or Not - Prisoner coverage
[ In Reply To ..]There's always something weird, isn't there? I will have to think on that prisoner population thing, but for the rest of the population and the hospitals themselves, I would still support Medicaid Expansion.
An aside about prisoner medical care: For those - wanting inhouse MT jobs, - sm
[ In Reply To ..]in California, the CA prison system is pretty much the ONLY employer left who still advertises for and hires MTs.
Sometimes it's the prisoners themselves doing - the transcription. I'm
[ In Reply To ..]not kidding.
You're right. But they're hiring SENIOR MTs - to over see and teach, too.
[ In Reply To ..]Of course, the sad thing about that is that the prisoners learning MT aren't learning a marketable skill for when they get out.
Instead of asking how we feel, how about - asking who is paying?
[ In Reply To ..]That's what I'm inferring from these posts.
This was discussed during the Obamacare debate - knowing full well this was
[ In Reply To ..]the logical and predictable outcome of limited resources and more people using those limited resources.
No one is for putting people out on the street. I'll ask my stressed out, over-worked brother in law whose a doctor what he thinks.
Medicaid Expansion-Support or Not - Thought
[ In Reply To ..]this was a captive audience, so to speak, since our very jobs depend on this. There are so many posts about jobs going away, low pay, et cetera, yet the cognitive dissonance related to this subject by all the Republican posting is curious to me. Sort of wondering how you all shore up these divisions. Cuz, if they don't figure out how to pay for healthcare, we aren't going to have jobs. We just aren't as necessary as doctors and nurses. So far, we we have been included in the gravy train because "documentation is needed for billing," but they are getting around that on a daily basis, VR, electronic charting, Dragon, DOCTOR'S TYPING THEIR OWN...and there won't be anybody to bill, if there is no funding.
BTW, are prisoners and GITMO people not supposed to have healthcare. As for GITMO, have you heard of the Geneva Convention? I think, (and I really do mean that, cuz I don't have time for the research), but I think it covers taking care of those people too.
Once again, yes, WE pay for it, and it is the price for living in a CIVILIZED society
I support it, because I'm ON it. - :-/
[ In Reply To ..]
I support it - Well's There that!
[ In Reply To ..]nm
"The hospital is in serious economic difficulty - partl because our state will
[ In Reply To ..]not accept Medicaid Expansion" Does that mean all of their patients are on Medicaid? That's part of the problem.
Second part of your question. Am I for keeping a failing business open just to keep my job? Since medicine is no longer free market and the cost will continue to rise, the answer is no.
Third part of your question. Essentially, do I want to throw people out on the street? Of course not.
Welcome to nationalized health care.
Medicaid Expansion-Support or Not - Of course they are not all on Medicaid
[ In Reply To ..]but the ones who are normally eligible are presenting a significant problem for the state owned hospital systems and smaller community hospitals that don't have a large enough private base to balance this underfunded cost.
I think many of us were very happy when healthcare costs kept sky-rocketing, insurance companies were making money hand over fist, and those with wonderful insurance got all the services they needed, and we just looked the other way with those people going bankrupt with their medical bills or not getting the appropriate care they needed. We have all typed on them. Wondering why in the world they didn't have that 3 lb mass in their abdomen examined before it became so metastatic there was no hope, et cetera. A lot of this is not just ignorance, some is, but for the most part, people don't get healthcare because of cost. The ACA is helping people get the care they need...like it or not. AND back to our happiness as MTs..we were making $50,000 to $75,000 a year without much trouble. Some of you have never seen that, but the money was just ripe for the picking...it's just not there anymore. It is in the insurance company's pocket and other monied concerns.
Most hospitals are in economic difficulty because - they have far too many - sm
[ In Reply To ..]over-paid people in management. And because they fell for the HMO vampires that took most of them over. And because all those overpaid execs in healthcare don't know the first thing about running a business. All they know is GREED.
Cloward-Pivin - N/M
[ In Reply To ..]Nm
You left out the evil doctors who perform - unnecessary amputations
[ In Reply To ..]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SG56B2et4M8
They must be the same doctors that get left & - right mixed up while dictating. (NM)
[ In Reply To ..]..
Similar Messages:
Medicaid ExpansionJul 15, 2014
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/07/15/3460133/republican-mayor-march-medicaid/ “Our state’s refusal to accept expansion is taking two billion dollars a year out of our state’s healthcare system,” the mayor wrote in an op-ed to explain why he’s making the trek over the next two weeks. “Americans need to realize the rural healthcare struggles across our country. In the last year, more rural hospitals have closed than in the previous 15 years. Ev ...
GOP Governor Proposes Medicaid ExpansionFeb 06, 2013
LANSING, Mich.—Republican Gov. Rick Snyder on Wednesday called for extending Medicaid eligibility to hundreds of thousands of Michigan residents without health insurance, welcoming the option available under the Obama administration's health care overhaul. Snyder made the announcement at a Lansing hospital the day before he proposes his next state budget. "It's a win for all," he said while flanked by doctors, nurses and health officials. The chance to cover nearly half of the ...
Michigan GOP Passes Obamacare Medicaid Expansion.Aug 28, 2013
Long version from the NY Times: Medicaid Expansion Battle in Michigan Ends in Passage Carlos Osorio/Associated Press Gov. Rick Snyder of Michigan, center, flanked last month by officials of a hospital in Royal Oak, promoted his Medicaid plan. By MONICA DAVEY Published: August 27, 2013 FACEBOOK TWITTER GOOGLE+ SAVE E-MAIL SHARE PRINT REPRINTS CHICAGO — The fierce struggle among Republicans over whether to make Medicaid available to more low-i ...
Moody’s: States Refusing Medicaid Expansion Will ‘Put Pressure’ Aug 15, 2013
"Investor services and credit rating agency Moody’s has some news for GOP governors hesitant to expand their state Medicaid programs under Obamacare: either hospitals in states refusing the expansion, or the states themselves, will feel pressure on their credit ratings due to higher uncompensated care costs and cash-strapped budgets." .... Moody’s has consistently argued that Obamacare is a good deal for hospitals and states. In fact, before the Supreme Court had issued i ...
Another Obamacare Win: Red State Montana House Passes Medicaid ExpansionApr 11, 2015
Montana’s Republican-controlled House voted Thursday, 54-46, to approve federal subsidies for Medicaid expansion. Although Democrats are outnumbered 59-41 in the Montana House, a unified Democratic caucus joined forces with 13 Republicans who defected from their party’s leadership, to push Senate Bill 405 through the House chamber. The bill would expand Medicaid coverage to between 27,000 and 46,000 low-income Montanans who earn less than 138 percent of the federal poverty level. All 41 H ...
Gun Ban ExpansionJan 24, 2013
"The California Democrat intends to expand on the ban that expired in 2004, BY INCLUDING HANDGUNS AND SHOTGUNS (caps mine), in addition to rifles. She would decrease from two to one the number of cosmetic features on a gun to have it be considered an 'assault weapon.' This means that if a gun has just one item like a pistol grip or bayonet lug, then it is illegal. Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed into law the same ban in New York last week." Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/gu ...
ObamaCare: Dangerous Expansion Of IRS PowersMar 19, 2010
MY NOTE: I hope all of you double-digit IQers who voted for the Indonesian Interloper ENJOY your neobondage! Come back in a few years and tell us how much you ENJOY the feds collecting all your medical data, tracking your every move, deciding if you live or die, deciding if you are WORTHY of receiving medical treatment, deciding if you are WORTHY of REPRODUCING, transferring your "private" financial info to the DHHS, having you stand in long lines for medical care, etc. etc. O ...
Jonathan Turley On 'dangerous' Expansion Of Obama's PowersFeb 12, 2014
One word: Wowzer! Link: https://www.facebook.com/TheKellyFile/posts/10101487466267526?stream_ref=10 For some reason, I couldn't link the link. ...
Walgreens, Insurers Push Expansion Of Virtual Doctor VisitsJun 11, 2015
see a doctor on their smartphones or laptops for everyday ailments once the nation's largest drugstore chain and two major insurers expand a budding push into virtual health care. Walgreens said Wednesday that it will offer a smartphone application that links doctor and patients virtually in 25 states by the end of the year. That growth comes as UnitedHealth Group and the Blue Cross-Blue Shield insurer Anthem prepare to make their own non-emergency telemedicine services available to abou ...
Anybody Here On Medicaid? Do You Know IfOct 19, 2014
conditions, such as a torn knee ligament? Especially if it ends up needing surgery? ...
Another Lie Regarding The Enrollments On Medicaid Jan 17, 2014
386,000 as opposed to 4 million? I'd call that a big lie, Mr. Presidente. Wouldn't you? Do you even know the meaning of the word? Link ...
Where Is The Tea Party? Medicaid In JeopardyApr 29, 2011
Two years ago during the healthcare debate, the Tea Party was passionate in their insistence that government should keep their hands off Medicaid (never mind the fact that Medicaid is government run, socialized healthcare). Now that the Ryan plan has proposed phasing out Medicaid as we now know it for those who are 54 years old and younger, where is the Tea Party? I would think they would feel betrayed by the Republicans who ran in 2010 and promised to "protect" Medicaid. ...
Wouldn't GOP Govs Who Opt Out Of Medicaid Be Jun 28, 2012
on those who qualify for it under ACA while denying them access to coverage, forcing them all to fill up state and county subsidized medical facilities (thus creating a permanent uninsured underclass)....all in the name of telling the president to "shove it"? Could they think of a faster way to plunge the state deeper in debt? How does that jive with GOP tax and debt reduction policies and party mandates to decimate all social safety net programs? ...
This Is What Holding Back Medicaid Dec 21, 2014
and by the sounds of it, we MTs are about a paycheck and health crisis away from it, if you live in a non-Medicaid expansion state. ...
Missouri, A State That Didn't Take The MedicaidJun 22, 2017
it hurt them. The cuts the republicans are pushing for in the Medicaid will hurt them even more. Sorry for those of you who live in Missouri but if your republican governors had taken the expansion they wouldn't have suffered like they are now. ...
Conn. The Only State Signing More People Up For Obamacare Than Medicaid.Nov 22, 2013
nm ...
Wyoming’s Republican Governor Will Push To Expand Medicaid. Dec 03, 2014
One by one republican governors are accepting Medicaid expansion. ...
UnitedHealth's Warning Shows Medicaid Taking Over Obamacare.Nov 19, 2015
a Medicaid marketplace. Not only in terms of the design and quality of the narrow-network plans that are being offered, but in the actual carriers that sell those policies. Obamacare's costly regulations mean that the mix of people who sign up are tending to be older and sicker. Many young and otherwise healthy individuals continue to be priced out of the exchanges, even after the benefit of federal subsidies are baked into their costs. Meanwhile, it's the Medicaid managed care ...
Insurers Request Big Rate Hikes, Citing Medicaid (Obamacare)Jun 03, 2015
carriers on the Obamacare exchange are attributing proposed double-digit premium increases to next year’s private-market alterations to the New Hampshire Medicaid program. Minuteman Health Inc. — which entered the New Hampshire exchange market this year with the lowest premiums — has requested rate increases ranging from 42 to 51 percent for next year, according to healthcare.gov, the online exchange established by the Affordable Care Act. Maine Community Health Options asked for premiu ...
Planned Parenthood Paid $3 For Birth Control But Billed MedicaidNov 12, 2015
A little-known whistleblower lawsuit accuses Planned Parenthood clinics in Iowa of wrongly siphoning millions of American taxpayer dollars with a series of complicated billing schemes aimed at increasing profits. Among other dishonest practices, a former manager of the clinics alleges, Planned Parenthood staffers routinely purchased birth control pills for just under $3, billed Medicaid $35 for the same package of pills, and got reimbursed for $26. The lawsuit, brought by Sue Thayer, a 17 ...