Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Health and Wellness > Health Insurance
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-13-2016, 01:23 PM
 
31,683 posts, read 41,057,092 times
Reputation: 14434

Advertisements

We need to remember that many seniors are dependent on Medicaid in addition to Medicare for health care. Also many are counting on Medicaid for later life health support ( nursing homes etc). How Medicaid in the future is structured and the guidelines issued will go along way in depending the quality of life for many of us. The following article from the Heritage Foundation gives some perspective:

Three Steps to Medicaid Reform

Quote:
The House of Representatives recently passed a budget resolution that recommends a Medicaid block grant, which puts Medicaid spending on a budget like other government programs and gives states greater flexibility to manage the program. These are both important changes, but clear policy goals must accompany them to reform Medicaid in a fundamental way.
Quote:
There are various ways to put Medicaid spending on a budget. For instance, The Heritage Foundation’s Saving the American Dream fiscal plan sets an aggregate federal spending cap on Medicaid and other welfare programs. From there, the Heritage plan separates spending by non-disabled and disabled/elderly. The non-disabled spending is then converted into a per capita premium support subsidy. The disabled and elderly spending is then converted into a block grant to the states and adjusted on a per capita basis for medical inflation.
Quote:
Second, the plan transitions low-income elderly out of the current dueling Medicare and Medicaid structure and into a coordinated care model like Medicare Advantage, allowing Medicaid to provide additional assistance as necessary. Finally, the plan restores traditional Medicaid to a true safety net—intended to assist those with disabilities while providing greater flexibility to the states to address the complex needs of these populations.
How states decide to manage block grants and their ability to provide quite probably will vary from state to state. Perhaps future best places to retire will take this into account. On the other hand because of the expansion of Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act it will require states if the the act is repealed to make big decisions. Depending on the rules established they may favor immigrant populations the non elderly poor and and the young thus making different decisions than say South Carolina or Texas. Perhaps living in a state that didn't expand Medicaid will soon prove to be a better place.

It is probably worthy of thought and discussion.

Oh yeah and if repealed and Medicaid expansion ended California would lose 20 Billion in federal aid. That is a chunk of change and the subject of a big article in todays LA Times. I didn't link it because it deals more with the program and doesn't directly connect its impact to seniors. Lots of seniors in California on Medicaid and lots of immigrants and lots of support for health care support if the feds are paying.

Last edited by TuborgP; 11-13-2016 at 01:33 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-14-2016, 12:10 AM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
42,850 posts, read 26,307,990 times
Reputation: 34059
Block grants can be a disaster for recipients, the states are given great flexibility in spending the money and can siphon off a good deal of it to fund other programs. The other problem is that the feds don't generally increase the block grants so the value of the block grant diminishes over time. Also, under block grants if states run short of funds they can arbitrarily cap recipients or lower income threshold for eligibility Block Grants and per Capita Caps | Urban Institute

California has a demonstration program right now for dual eligibles where they are managing patient care to maximize savings, maybe the Heritage foundation shouldn't try to reinvent the wheel http://www.calduals.org/background/faq/

This statement in the Heritage piece disturbs me: "Congress needs to restore Medicaid to a true safety net program for the most vulnerable in society" That infers that they believe there are people receiving medicaid who shouldn't be, but they don't explain who those people are. As with most Heritage articles I find that what they don't say is usually more telling than what they do...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2016, 08:26 AM
 
31,683 posts, read 41,057,092 times
Reputation: 14434
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
Block grants can be a disaster for recipients, the states are given great flexibility in spending the money and can siphon off a good deal of it to fund other programs. The other problem is that the feds don't generally increase the block grants so the value of the block grant diminishes over time. Also, under block grants if states run short of funds they can arbitrarily cap recipients or lower income threshold for eligibility Block Grants and per Capita Caps | Urban Institute

California has a demonstration program right now for dual eligibles where they are managing patient care to maximize savings, maybe the Heritage foundation shouldn't try to reinvent the wheel http://www.calduals.org/background/faq/

This statement in the Heritage piece disturbs me: "Congress needs to restore Medicaid to a true safety net program for the most vulnerable in society" That infers that they believe there are people receiving medicaid who shouldn't be, but they don't explain who those people are. As with most Heritage articles I find that what they don't say is usually more telling than what they do...
Their defintion is often driven more by budget impact than by human suffering impact.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2016, 09:49 AM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
42,850 posts, read 26,307,990 times
Reputation: 34059
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
Their defintion is often driven more by budget impact than by human suffering impact.
Precisely my point, and that is the case with a good deal of what comes out of Heritage..the collateral damage of doing what is sometimes irreparable harm to people is whitewashed or ignored.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Health and Wellness > Health Insurance
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:00 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top