With the federal government piling on tons of debt, Cory Heidelberger and his fellow Democrats insist that South Dakota add on more debt by expanding Medicaid:
I don't see him doing any push-ups, but Democratic candidate for governor Joe Lowe is pushing his opponent, Governor Dennis Daugaard, on his treatment of hospitals and poor folks who need health coverage. Lowe opens the week with a press release decrying the Governor's refusal to take a huge infusion of federal cash to expand Medicaid.
Lowe opens not with the moral argument, but a practical market argument: pay people for the work they do!
I have the quaint opinion that doctors, nurses, and hospitals should be paid for their work. Dennis thinks they should just expect that they'll get stuck with the bill a certain percent of the time and should hope they can make up for it by overcharging someone else [Joe Lowe, press release, 2014.01.20].
Governor Daugaard claims that we don't dare expand Medicaid because he continues to "have doubts about the federal government’s ability to deliver on their promises." Lowe says that claim is inconsistent Tea-Party pandering:
If you follow that logic, South Dakota should not accept highway funds, school funds, college funds or any other billions in federal money that flow through the state budget. He's using a double standard.
That double standard points to another big difference between Dennis and me. He's apparently afraid of the Tea Party. I'm not [Lowe, 2014.01.20].
Lowe is hoping any Tea Party vote for which Daugaard may be angling will be neutralized by the 48,000 South Dakotans he's trying to help:
We have 48,000 people left in the cold by Dennis's double standard. It's mean-spirited and short-sighted. It's damaging to people's health, it's damaging to our medical providers, and in the long run it's more expensive [Lowe, 2014.01.20].
Governor Daugaard, you and the Legislature have two months to take this issue off the election table. Expand Medicaid, and you help people, pay hospitals, stimulate the economy, and take a really useful argument away from your political opponents.
Sorry I copied the whole post, but I wanted to make sure I had their argument in context. And I would make my argument over at the Mad site, but I have been banned from making comments.
I just so happened to know someone on Medicare who recently required an emergency operation. The bill from the hospital was over $39,000. Medicare paid a little over $6,000 and is making the patient who gets about $800 a mong in Social Security (about $10,00 per year) chip in over $1,200. So instead of being out the full $39,000, thanks to the government's Medicare program, the Corporate Medical establishment is out $32,000. So the South Dakota Democrats want expand another government program that will use additional federal debt so the hospitals only have to shift $32,000 instead of $39,000? A reduction of 15%.
And the Democrats claim not to be afraid of a Tea Party movement that points out that the Constitution prohibited federal involvement in funding the states' medical schooling and yes...highways. That all changed when FDR packed the Supreme Court with socialists who systematically destroyed the American Constitutional Republic. Well Daugaard and the rest of the SDGOP establishment are also not afraid of the Tea Party, as they accept $2 billion in federal debt backed money for highways, schools and yes medical costs, and all in the name of a "Planned Global Economy" which includes things like federal EB-5 programs. But in reality they are planning a global economic failure.
Bottom line, Cory, Lowe and the rest of the Democrats are willing to be 85% Republican when it comes to making hospitals cost shift low-income medical bills. That is pretty much an argument that is 85% double standard to charge the other side for being guilty of using double standards. More and more it becomes obvious that both political parties are wrong. How many have the courage to stand on their own two feet and say that?
Recent Comments