Big Goverment in Arizona by GOPer Brewer

[kiwiman127]

Arizona Proposes Medicaid Fat Fee

Arizona's governor on Thursday proposed levying a $50 fee on some enrollees in the state's cash-starved Medicaid program, including obese people who don't follow a doctor-supervised slimming regimen and smokers.

The plan, if approved by the Republican-dominated legislature, would mark the first time the state-federal health-care program for the poor has charged people for engaging in behavior deemed unhealthy

Arizona Proposes Medicare Fat Fee - WSJ.com

So here we Brewer telling people that have to be thinner and they must not eat in a unhealthy manner or smoke, it's going to cost them! She actually wrote wrote legislation controlling people's lives.

I expect all the anti-Big Government types and Michelle Obama haters to chime in on these facts. Brewer is making a law about obesity and the far right slammed Michelle Obama hard for her simple comments about child obesity.

 

[Oddball]

Governors and state legislatures are mandated by the feds to fund Medicare/Medicaid.

But why let little details like that get in the way?

 

[Anachronism]

We're talking about ADULTS here, kiwi. People who have the ability to make decisions for themselves. If they've got enough cash lying around without anything to spend it on that they can afford fast food and/or cigarettes, they can afford to chip in a little bit for their own Medicaid. I do hope that fat smokers get charged double.

If you don't like it, why not propose getting rid of the illegal and unconstitutional Medicaid program all together?

 

[peach174]

It's either that or take out certain provisions.
One way or another the budget has to be balanced.
And believe it or not same thing is going to happen with new Fed Health Care Plan, only under the Fed's they can ban foods that they think is unhealthy in Grocery stores, restaurants, fast food places and schools.

 

[Greenbeard]

Governors and state legislatures are mandated by the feds to fund Medicare/Medicaid.

State governments don't fund Medicare. And they're certainly not required to have a Medicaid program.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Nobody thinks small government is a GOP principle anymore, right?

 

[bodecea]

Nobody thinks small government is a GOP principle anymore, right?

Nope....nanny state is ok, if it is THEIR nanny state.

 

[Oddball]

Governors and state legislatures are mandated by the feds to fund Medicare/Medicaid.

State governments don't fund Medicare. And they're certainly not required to have a Medicaid program.

Oh, so this "cost sharing" thingy is just a figment of my imagination?

 

[peach174]

Governors and state legislatures are mandated by the feds to fund Medicare/Medicaid.

State governments don't fund Medicare. And they're certainly not required to have a Medicaid program.

Oh yes they do;
Who pays for Medicaid?

States and the federal government share in the cost of Medicaid. The federal share of a state’s Medicaid expenditures is determined by a formula—called the Federal Medical Assistance Percentages (FMAP)—that is outlined in federal statute and that allocates funds to pay a share of the cost of services delivered through the program. States with per capita incomes below the national average receive higher matching percentages, and those with per capita incomes above the national average receive lower matching percentages. Every state receives at least a 50 percent match. Some services, such as family planning, are reimbursed at a higher federal match rate. Federal matching rates for each state are updated annually, published in the Federal Register, and posted at http://aspe.os.dhhs.gov/health/fmap.htm. Most administrative expenditures are matched by the federal government at 50 percent. Certain administrative costs, however—such as those related to Medicaid management information systems (MMIS)—receive a higher federal matching rate.

States are not required to participate in Medicaid, although a large financial incentive exists to do so. If a state chooses to participate, Medicaid is an entitlement to the state as well as to individuals as long as covered services are provided to eligible people in accordance with federal statute and an approved state plan or waiver. In other words, the federal government will pay its share of the Medicaid costs as long as individuals covered, services provided, providers reimbursed, and rates paid are consistent with the state’s Medicaid state plan or waivers approved by the federal government.

 

[Anachronism]

Nobody thinks small government is a GOP principle anymore, right?

That depends....

If I have a book of rules that has 10,000 entries, and I add 15 more, but remove 300 have I increased or decrease the size of the book? Have I made life more or less restrictive?

I think that most of us on the Conservative end of the spectrum will tell you that YES we are interested in restricting a lot of things in American society and culture. We're for instituting and rigidly enforcing a certain code of morals and values on those who choose to live outside of what we consider to be an acceptable society. Now, inside of those boundaries, you're pretty much free to do whatever you want.

Look at it this way.... The Conservative outlook is a narrow path through life. Step off it and you fall into a great chasm of doom. However, while you're on it you can walk, crawl, run, skip, hop, jump, ride a horse or a bike, drive a car, etc... You just have to do it ON THAT PATH.

 

[Greenbeard]

Oh, so this "cost sharing" thingy is just a figment of my imagination?

States get a federal match for state dollars they spend if they want to run a Medicaid program. The figment of your imagination is the notion that they're required (sorry, "mandated" is the word you chose) to participate in Medicaid or to spend those state dollars.

 

[Greenbeard]

Governors and state legislatures are mandated by the feds to fund Medicare/Medicaid.

State governments don't fund Medicare. And they're certainly not required to have a Medicaid program.

Oh yes they do;

Grammatically I assume "yes they do" is a response to the statement that state governments don't fund Medicare. Obviously they do not, as Medicare is entirely a federal program. Medicaid is the state-administered program (note: this is distinct from Medicare) you're thinking of and, as your link notes, "States are not required to participate in Medicaid, although a large financial incentive exists to do so."

So, thanks for the corroboration.

 

[Oddball]

Oh, so this "cost sharing" thingy is just a figment of my imagination?

States get a federal match for state dollars they spend if they want to run a Medicaid program. The figment of your imagination is the notion that they're required (sorry, "mandated" is the word you chose) to participate in Medicaid or to spend those state dollars.

You're either a fool or a paid propagandist.

My money is on the latter.

 

[EriktheRed]

Nobody thinks small government is a GOP principle anymore, right?

That depends....

If I have a book of rules that has 10,000 entries, and I add 15 more, but remove 300 have I increased or decrease the size of the book? Have I made life more or less restrictive?

I think that most of us on the Conservative end of the spectrum will tell you that YES we are interested in restricting a lot of things in American society and culture. We're for instituting and rigidly enforcing a certain code of morals and values on those who choose to live outside of what we consider to be an acceptable society. Now, inside of those boundaries, you're pretty much free to do whatever you want.

Look at it this way.... The Conservative outlook is a narrow path through life. Step off it and you fall into a great chasm of doom. However, while you're on it you can walk, crawl, run, skip, hop, jump, ride a horse or a bike, drive a car, etc... You just have to do it ON THAT PATH.

So a con admits it....

 

[Oddball]

State governments don't fund Medicare. And they're certainly not required to have a Medicaid program.

Oh yes they do;

Grammatically I assume "yes they do" is a response to the statement that state governments don't fund Medicare. Obviously they do not, as Medicare is entirely a federal program. Medicaid is the state-administered program (note: this is distinct from Medicare) you're thinking of and, as your link notes, "States are not required to participate in Medicaid, although a large financial incentive exists to do so."

So, thanks for the corroboration.

Most of us know this "financial incentive" as extortion out in the real world.

 

[Greenbeard]

Oh, so this "cost sharing" thingy is just a figment of my imagination?

States get a federal match for state dollars they spend if they want to run a Medicaid program. The figment of your imagination is the notion that they're required (sorry, "mandated" is the word you chose) to participate in Medicaid or to spend those state dollars.

You're either a fool or a paid propagandist.

My money is on the latter.

I just want to be sure no one is confused into thinking you have any idea what you're talking about. That would be a very silly error.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Nobody thinks small government is a GOP principle anymore, right?

That depends....

If I have a book of rules that has 10,000 entries, and I add 15 more, but remove 300 have I increased or decrease the size of the book? Have I made life more or less restrictive?

I think that most of us on the Conservative end of the spectrum will tell you that YES we are interested in restricting a lot of things in American society and culture. We're for instituting and rigidly enforcing a certain code of morals and values on those who choose to live outside of what we consider to be an acceptable society. Now, inside of those boundaries, you're pretty much free to do whatever you want.

Look at it this way.... The Conservative outlook is a narrow path through life. Step off it and you fall into a great chasm of doom. However, while you're on it you can walk, crawl, run, skip, hop, jump, ride a horse or a bike, drive a car, etc... You just have to do it ON THAT PATH.

I disagree with that assessment, look at government from 2001-2007, you certainly couldn't say they wanted to add 15 things and subtract 300. Was there any government program that got smaller or any budget that was lowered in that time frame with full republican control?

Both parties are equally fiscally liberal to me.

 

[Oddball]

States get a federal match for state dollars they spend if they want to run a Medicaid program. The figment of your imagination is the notion that they're required (sorry, "mandated" is the word you chose) to participate in Medicaid or to spend those state dollars.

You're either a fool or a paid propagandist.

My money is on the latter.

I just want to be sure no one is confused into thinking you have any idea what you're talking about. That would be a very silly error.

Right here, Mr. Bernays.

I am, however, fluent in Orwellean doblespeak...Which is why career bullshitters like you just don't fool me anymore.

 

[Anachronism]

I disagree with that assessment, look at government from 2001-2007, you certainly couldn't say they wanted to add 15 things and subtract 300. Was there any government program that got smaller or any budget that was lowered in that time frame with full republican control?

Both parties are equally fiscally liberal to me.

I don't believe I was discussing either Republicans or Democrats. I was discussing CONSERVATIVES. Now, of course the last one of those to be found in Washington, DC was Andrew Jackson, but that's a different topic. Neither party is anything but both fiscally and socially Liberal. That's the only way to get elected in this country. Now the Tea Partiers talk a little better game than the other two groups, but I'm not confident they really mean it, or are willing to walk the talk. Especially on the topic of social conservatism.

 

[kiwiman127]

As I suspected, the righties are hypocrites.
When the Dems try to control your lives, that's one thing, but the GOP, well that's totally different.
Michelle Obama wants a campaign for children obesity, well she sticking her nose in the people's business but Tea Party favorite Brewer pushes for legislation about obesity, well that's something different.
Go to the Michelle Obama/child obesity thread (s) and read what the Brewer defenders posted. Go the still active smoker thread and read what the righties posted, now look at this thread.
When I read about Brewer's actions, I thought, "I bet the righties will support her because the always want it both ways.
Of course the far left is no different.