[Vision2020] Health care {insurance} reform passed

[Sue Hovey]

The biggest problem with Medicaid we have found for Leslie is regardless of 
all the rest, few drs. in Moscow and NO dentists will take it.  She had to 
have a tooth extracted last month and it costs $168 which we paid.  Now we 
can afford to do that, but what if she were a person alone and had no one to 
help her?  A few years ago she had a tooth pulled (covered by Medicaid at 
that time but the dentist no longer accepts Medicaid patients.)  However, 
the tooth broke off and left the roots in her mouth--requiring surgery not 
covered by Medicaid.  The cost for an oral surgeon was significant, over 
$700.  The irony in this is that it wasn't covered by Medicaid, but the 
potential for infection and possible death was extremely high.  I supported 
Health Reform because I know full well it has to be far more humanitarian 
than what we now have, regardless of the caveats, etc.  And the gall of 
Idaho Legislators whose  budget cuts to HHS some years ago,  resulted in the 
denial of dentures to a low income elderly woman whose teeth had been 
extracted.  In fact the administrator, when asked how she might be able to 
eat, responded, "She can gum her food."  Because it made national headlines, 
money was found to provide them for her.  So now we go to court to try to 
head off National Health Reform.  Next, I suppose we should try to repeal 
the 19th Amendment....

I am relieved there seems to be consensus the state suits will probably not 
persuade even the current US Supreme Court justices. Amazing that, given 
their propensity to ignore the plight of ordinary citizens in other arenas.

Sue Hovey

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Andreas Schou" <ophite at gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 4:23 PM
To: "Love America" <skialaska0 at gmail.com>
Cc: "vision2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>; "Donovan Arnold" 
<donovanjarnold2008 at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Health care {insurance} reform passed

>> Look at FY08 Medicaid spending in Idaho... $369,000,000 for around 
>> 220,000
>> residents or around $1670 per person.  Under the new law everyone who is
>> Medicaid eligible will be required to go on Medicaid.
>
> This isn't true, I suspect, unless some other subsection overrules
> this one in a way I don't understand. True, mandate requires all
> families to maintain minimum essential coverage.  However, there's an
> exemption in Chapter 48(e)(1)(A), which reads as follows:
>
> "IN GENERAL- Any applicable individual for any month if the applicable
> individual’s required contribution (determined on an annual basis) for
> coverage for the month exceeds 8 percent of such individual’s
> household income for the taxable year described in section
> 1412(b)(1)(B) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. For
> purposes of applying this subparagraph, the taxpayer’s household
> income shall be increased by any exclusion from gross income for any
> portion of the required contribution made through a salary reduction
> arrangement."
>
> I'll admit that there's a possibility that at some point in the
> future, that could become a problem. If the yearly cost of "minimum
> essential coverage"  dropped below 8% of 133% of the poverty line, or
> around $1,760 in hypothetical 2014-bucks for Donovan's two-person
> family, then a Medicaid-eligible family would be required to go to the
> private market to find insurance. However, that would solve more
> problems than it created.
>
>> Then add in that Medicaid sucks, you have no real choice of doctors, they
>> decide your treatment plans and options, they can deny "expensive"
>> medications, many states drug test those who receive Medicaid, other add 
>> in
>> the insult of throwing in various child protective service requirements.
>
> Medicaid isn't great. It does, however, receive higher marks for
> satisfaction than America's private insurance market. See here, for
> instance:
>
> http://www.nationaljournal.com/njonline/mp_20090629_2600.php
>
>> Have any of you actually read the new law?
>
> I'm not accusing you of anything, Chris, but it doesn't look like
> you've read it either*.
>
> -- ACS
>
> * I haven't read the whole thing not only because it's long, but
> because it's got a lot of moving parts; cross-referencing 2000 pages
> worth of legalese is roughly impossible, even for a specialist. I
> suspect you can get a better sense of it from the chairman's draft and
> summaries than by reading the actual text itself. However, if you do
> actually want to subject yourself to the whole thing, you can find it
> here:
>
> http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3590/text?version=enr&nid=t0:enr:1727
>
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>               http://www.fsr.net
>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================