Medicaid and Defense Contracts
America's governors would likely be evaluated for competency if defense contracts were treated like Medicaid, but the money for both programs comes from tax revenues.
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/07/11/514613/investors-medicaid-expansion/?mobile=nc
Defense contracts provide good jobs. Medicaid funding provides good jobs.
Defense contracts invites the proliferation of fraudulent suppliers. Medicaid funding risks proliferation of fraudulent providers.
Defense contracts builds equipment used for national security. Medicaid funding provides safety net services for children and the poor.
Governors who turn their backs on Medicaid expansion would have a lot of explaining to do by pulling out of defense contracts. In fact, under the Affordable Care Act (ACA- health care reform), the Federal Government provides the bulk of the funding for Medicaid expansion beginning in 2014, and the money continues for three years. Yet, there's no difference in the source of funding for both programs.
Most defense contracts are usually extended for 3-5 years. Medicaid expansion under ACA extends for about the same period of time.
It defies gravity for governors to walk on this sweet deal. It's especially concerning because many balking governors are leaders of states where the people need the coverage most, like in Texas. Governor Rick Perry, for example, shouldn't leap at getting his name in the headlines by announcing how Texas will turn it's back on Medicaid expansion, funded by the Federal Government. Governor Rick Perry and his colleague governors are leaders of all the people, rich, poor, insured, uninsured, immigrant and citizens. Shame on Governor Perry for leaping to the conclusion that Texas should opt out of Medicaid expansion. By his knee jerk reactionary response, he'll turn the state's back on a percentage of the population who need the care while preventing providing good jobs for those who work in worthy programs.
Governors who turn their backs on Medicaid expansion for ideological reasons, because they are Republicans, should be asked, by the media, if they would also walk on lucrative defense contracts.
There's no difference. Both programs are funded by our tax revenues. More needs to be made of this important non-distinction.
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/07/11/514613/investors-medicaid-expansion/?mobile=nc
Defense contracts provide good jobs. Medicaid funding provides good jobs.
Defense contracts invites the proliferation of fraudulent suppliers. Medicaid funding risks proliferation of fraudulent providers.
Defense contracts builds equipment used for national security. Medicaid funding provides safety net services for children and the poor.
Governors who turn their backs on Medicaid expansion would have a lot of explaining to do by pulling out of defense contracts. In fact, under the Affordable Care Act (ACA- health care reform), the Federal Government provides the bulk of the funding for Medicaid expansion beginning in 2014, and the money continues for three years. Yet, there's no difference in the source of funding for both programs.
Most defense contracts are usually extended for 3-5 years. Medicaid expansion under ACA extends for about the same period of time.
It defies gravity for governors to walk on this sweet deal. It's especially concerning because many balking governors are leaders of states where the people need the coverage most, like in Texas. Governor Rick Perry, for example, shouldn't leap at getting his name in the headlines by announcing how Texas will turn it's back on Medicaid expansion, funded by the Federal Government. Governor Rick Perry and his colleague governors are leaders of all the people, rich, poor, insured, uninsured, immigrant and citizens. Shame on Governor Perry for leaping to the conclusion that Texas should opt out of Medicaid expansion. By his knee jerk reactionary response, he'll turn the state's back on a percentage of the population who need the care while preventing providing good jobs for those who work in worthy programs.
Governors who turn their backs on Medicaid expansion for ideological reasons, because they are Republicans, should be asked, by the media, if they would also walk on lucrative defense contracts.
There's no difference. Both programs are funded by our tax revenues. More needs to be made of this important non-distinction.
Labels: Medicaid
posted by Juliana L'Heureux | 4:50 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home