Ridiculous Study of the Week: Medicaid Expansion Decreases the Uninsured
Here is another shining example of brilliance in academia:
A new study projects that large cities could see the number of uninsured drop almost 60 percent under ObamaCare’s Medicaid expansion. The report by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Urban Institute looked at numbers for 14 major cities and estimated the percentage of uninsured would drop by an average of 57 percent in 2016 if states that have adopted the Medicaid expansion.
Wow. So what you are saying is that if you give away free health insurance (Medicaid) then you drop the number of uninsured? How do they do it? I mean, I never saw that coming. In other news, an increase in marriages somehow correlates with a decrease in the number of single people.
Why does everybody think Medicaid is free? I have a severely disabled friend on Medicaid due to disastrous medical issues which made her unable to afford even the co-pays for her care. Going on Medicaid means they scrutinize your income and expenses and they decide how much of your own income you get to keep. She is allowed to keep only $767 of her own income per month to pay her rent, utilities, car insurance, gas, etc. Pets are considered frivolous and if your expenses show expenditures for them, Medicaid decides you can afford to give them more of your income because you have enough for frivolous things. Even so, it doesn’t cover ALL co-pays so there are still some medical expenses. (Fortunately she also qualifies for food stamps, but there are always more bills than money.)
At most they pay is the the copay which most offices waive (because they know they will never get it).
On any given day at work someone will come to the ER for minor heartburn or a mild ache, and tell me they couldn’t afford the over-the-counter medication, “but I’ve got Medicaid”. So they can run up a huge bill for the taxpayer for an ER charge to get “free” Motrin or Robitussin without ever considering who’s actually paying for it, with their cigarettes plainly visible in the purse or pocket. Worse still, are the young women who come in all the time for a “free” pregnancy test, not on birth control, with a couple of kid-dependents in tow, who then found out yep, another ‘miracle’ is on the way. I resent the hell out of having to pay for someone else’s apathy. I resent the hell out of the many times that I’ve prescribed “free” medicines to Medicaid patients who just didn’t end up taking the anyway, because, well, they forgot… Like the numerous obese who are on food stamps, Medicaid encourages bad outcomes. And often worse than the Medicare beneficiaries, they are the first to complain if they don’t get what they want.
Your friend sounds a truly sad case, but those are not the majority of those living on the dole.
I love how the true believers confirm their brilliance by using their agenda as the predetermined conclusion. I’m really, really looking forward to the (active) zombie pandemic.
Ah, they’ve caught you! The mission of the lofty Study is no more run in pursuit of Reason, than was dear old Pravda published by the Soviet Union on the mission of hard-hitting, no-sacred-cows incisive journalism. Each one has a reason.
In this study, academia has been set aside. The new trend is to give political and intellectual power to the Foundation. You’ll notice that the handpuppets of the ivory tower are cast aside for this publication, which comes from Two Powerful Foundations.
The study suggested/decided/found that “Medicaid and CHIP enrollment will increase under the ACA by an average of 38.5 percent in the seven Medicaid expansion cities and 10.7 percent in the seven nonexpansion cities (Figure 1 )” The study also found “ACA will bring a large amount of new federal funding into all 14 cities. “ This is the meat of the argument. Federal Spending will increase, but the infrastructure of medicine will be neglected.
For the pro-expansion cities, “the amount of federal dollars coming into Los Angeles would be $27 billion over this period and $4.1 billion in Seattle. Total spending, federal and state, would be $30.3 billion in Los Angeles and $4.6 billion in Seattle. “ To politicians, Federal Money is Job Security. This money will be spent, no doubt about that – but how? You don’t see a scrambling to build clinics and hire doctors and nurses and lay down the brick-and-mortar of the medical production line. Something’s fishy here.
Since in America, we no longer DO, we simply regulate, we live under the pretense that a JCAHO-job with a clipboard is every bit as meaningful as one with a stethoscope. They are all equal, says the fiction – but some are more equal than others. The effect, if measured by sick people getting better, will be disappointing. However, the skills found in the flea-circus of statistics will be greatly supported – all sorts of Excel spreadsheets will be ground out in fluorescently-lit offices, to describe the exact detail, fiber-count and style of the Emperor’s Clothes.