Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forum10 GOP Governors have decided to turn down BILLIONS in federal funds, leave 3.5 million uninsured
10 GOP Governors have decided to turn down BILLIONS in federal funds, leave 3.5 million uninsured
Florida
Georgia
Iowa
Indiana
Kansas
Louisiana
New Jersey
South Carolina
South Dakota
Wisconsin
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/07/02/509464/gop-governors-may-turn-down-258-billion-in-obamacare-funds-leave-92-million-americans-uninsured/
freshwest
(53,661 posts)elleng
(130,759 posts)and may include 2 'blue' states among those who appealed to SC.
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)Also, the chart shows 24 states haven't decided yet, so yes the total of states (decided and undecided) could go all the way up to 34
mucifer
(23,487 posts)stockholmer
(3,751 posts)The country is getting fatter, older, sicker, and poorer. The Republicans are just hurrying the process along.
FirstLight
(13,357 posts)AYFKM!?
HOW can they refuse a FEDERAL Law? This is BEYOND BULLSHIT! grrrrr!
If I were living in one of those states, I'd be stirring up shit with the Governor's office BIGTIME ...
Disgusting....
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)there can be no penalty to the states for refusing to accept the Medicaid Expansion/Funds
In the original ACA there was a stipulation that if the states didn't join in the Medicaid Expansion then it would affect their existing appropriation funds.
So, now there is nothing stopping the states from refusing the 'Medicaid expansion'.
And in the states where is a Democratic Governor and a GOP State House the expansion still must be passed by the State legislators - so there lies a problem too.
Kennah
(14,234 posts)Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)Kennah
(14,234 posts)Not sure if these are two entirely different pieces of ACA. I know Washington State is among those establishing a state run HBE, in accordance with ACA. I have been reading and am still unclear about the Medicaid Expansion component, other than the SCOTUS allowed states to opt out and some are.
limpyhobbler
(8,244 posts)States can opt in to either one.
If a state doesn't create an Exchange people in that state can use the federal Exchange.
Actually I'm kind of hoping my state will not create an exchange so I can use the federal exchange, which I'm assuming would be better.
If a state chooses not to take the funds for expanded Medicaid, then they just don't get the expanded Medicaid. Which will leave millions uninsured like the picture in the OP shows.
Hope I got that right. I'm sure someone will correct me if not.
Thanks Tx4obama for the informational thread.
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)The Medicaid Expansion is an expansion to cover more folks via Medicaid - the states' legislators have to pass a bill and the governors have to sign the bill in order to get the Medicaid Expansion funding. If they don't then they don't get the money and the people of their states are the ones that will suffer. Due to Roberts ruling on ACA the feds can't make the states take the 'expansion' - Roberts took away the penalty for not accepting it.
And as far as the 'ACA exchanges': The States have until mid-November to set up their states' exchange - if they decide not to then the feds have the authority to set up the exchange for the state. There is no way for the state to not have an exchange.
Kennah
(14,234 posts)So by opting out of Medicaid Expansion, a state will fuck over it's most vulnerable citizens. Heckuva of a plan.
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)-snip-
Starting in 2014, the Affordable Care Act expands Medicaid, the massively popular program which makes health insurance available for lower-income Americans. For the first three years, the federal government covers 100 percent of the expansion costs. After five years, the federal government finances 90 percent of the expanded population.
Not a single Republican governor has pledged to accept the new Medicaid funds and three Democrats are also considering turning down the money. In total, these states would give up $291.4 billion in federal funds and leave 10,297,221 Americans uninsured.
-snip-