Here is the statement; I make too much to get medicare and not enough to get Obama care.
Can that be so in Alabama? It don't make any sense.
Yall help me out.
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Jt, it goes back to the wording of the law and the Supreme Court decision and the problem has been known for some time. The wording of the ACA law states that individuals and families below certain amounts must go on Medicaid. The Supreme Court decided that states could choose to expand Medicaid or opt out. The state of Alabama was already perplexed on how to afford the present number of people on Medicaid, so Alabama opted out. This only applies to the exchanges so theoretically people can buy a private plan but there would be no subsidies, and with the law jacking up the price of unsubsidized insurance, some people are really screwed. It will take Congress to change the law or a royal proclamation.
Jt the Gov. Bentley has chose to not expand medicaid even though it would not cost the state a dime and would actually create over 30,000 jobs because he is using the health and welfare of the poor citizens in our state to make a political statement. They fall into the gap. When the Supreme Court left it up to the states to make that decision it gave Republican Gov's a way of trying to make insurance for all even harder to obtain, so that they could point the finger at the new ACA law as the problem when in reality if they actually took part in the plan it would work for all citizens.
Write to Gov Bentley and tell him to stop using the poor to further his political stance.
According to State Health Officer Don Williamson, Alabama’s Medicaid program was on the brink of collapse if it did not receive funding from last year’s September 18th transfer from the Alabama Trust fund. This year, even with the benefit from the transfer, Williamson claims Medicaid will face a $100 million budget shortfall. He also predicts that “after 2014, there is no money left” for Medicaid.
http://www.al.com/opinion/inde...for_alabama_med.html
Sorry, Bentley is not as divine as Obama nor can he lay gold eggs. Yes, there would be short term "free money" from the Feds', but one day the "magic money" evaporates. Remember, Alabama doesn't own the printing presses.
I thought if your income was of a certain level, you got federal help on insurance
No. If you're truly poor (below the Federal Poverty Level for your size of family), you go to Medicaid. The AHA is for the working class of people I'll call the middle class and lower middle class. Everyone's raising cain about the AHA, and it is only for approximately 15% of the population.
Alabama is a state that's very, very low in taxation. For example, property taxes in Tennessee and most other Southern states approach 4 times that of Alabama. Lack of money is one reason our schools really don't improve from year to year.
Our governor has said that Alabama doesn't have the money to pickup our 10% after the first 3 years of the Feds picking up 100% of the tab. And, he's right.
Are you willing to double your state income tax or take away all the exemptions? How about quadrupling your property taxes needed to expand Medicaid? I'm not.
Jt, the level of income to meet the requirement to enter the exchanges is 133% of the poverty line. As to modifying the law, Congress should be the ones to start the process by legislation to remedy the problem according to the Constitution. But then again, Barbara Walters' Messiah might as well make another decree and spend more. Obama should be up for another Lie of the Year award without any more effort.
Thus, even if administration officials find a magic way to increase subsidies without Congress, Obama will be forced to answer for another famous pledge:
"I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits — either now or in the future. I will not sign it if it adds one dime to the deficit, now or in the future, period."
About 29 states made the choice to not accept Obamacare Medicaid, so Alabama is in the majority on this decision. They see the inevitability of declining federal support after 3 years.
Comparing Tennessee with Alabama on property taxes is only part of the story. Alabama has an income tax; Tennessee has none.
BTW, Obamacare, like Medicare and Social Security, must finance itself out of mandated taxes and fees (plus state contributions in three years). Short falls can't be made up from the General Fund. The federal government will either have to raise Obamacare taxes, demand states increase their contributions, and/or cut back on coverage. (As an aside, social security will be cut by 25 percent in 2030, if changes aren't made).
Demanding instant gratification, without considering future consequences, is the action of a child or a progressive. Children, lacking reason and experience, have an excuse.
I own a house and lot in both Alabama and Tennessee. Do not believe that story about Tennessee property tax being 4 times higher. In 1970, property in Alabama with an assessed value of $93,000 was taxed at $150. Property in Tennessee with an assessed value of $31,000 was taxed at $275.
In 2013, property assessed at $15,000 in Alabama cost about $155. Property in Tennessee assessed at $55,000 cost $250 in tax
jt,
What you describe is in the essence the problem with this Act and how it will be detrimental to the middle class. You make too much for a supplement, and not enough to buy a quality plan. The state could not afford to take any more on the Medicaid roles, and Jank seems to look over the fact that it would not cost the state anything today, BUT in two years they would have been saddled with the entire bill with no choice but to either kick people off or raise the taxes further. most will agree that we are paying too much now, with both state and federal taxes, as well as property and business taxes, but they would have us add even more of tax burden to populace. The plan was ill concieved and like I have told you before there were alternatives to what was done. not all of it was bad, but the largest percentage will do the average middle class citizen any good, unless they enjoy paying more for less and watching their tax bill increase.
One thing wrong with insurance as we know it. When I worked temporary jobs out of a union hall, the hall would get a package deal from a company, and every hour that I worked, some pretax money went to insurance. You had to work about 1700 hours a year to keep coverage. In 1990, I worked 3300 hours. BCBS got that payment every hour and I got no credit for the overpayment.
My wife didn't work, but we had good coverage. Others worked the same hours and their wives worked and got family coverage at their jobs. They actually were paying double for no added benefit. This is still going on and the insurance companies don't want no changes, so they have lobbiests and PR firms working for them
JT sorry you are getting the short end of stick but you voted for change. This health care law is sticking it too approx 75 to 85 percent of the general population to supposedly help the other 15 to .20 percent. Sadly that is the problem most of us against Obamacare saw coming. The next move is everything will be so messed up they "liberals" will try to get a universal one payer system put in place to "fix" everything.