He's never struck me as having actual principles, so why is he so opposed to what his own legislature wants? Is he seeking higher Office? Has he radicalized?
OT: what is up with Tate and Medicaid expansion?
- Thread starter Boom Boom
- Start date
- Status
He hates the working poor. Seriously, this should have been a slam dunk 10 years ago when ObamaCare first passed. It's literally free money for Mississippi and it's working poor. I get the impact on the Federal deficit, and he's not wrong. But that's not his freaking responsibility.
IDK, he's been pretty consistent his entire career when it comes to punishing those who struggle financially.
Dumb, Poor, and Unhealthy: The Mississippi Way of Life
Missippi gone Missippi. You can't be last in everything if you don't keep doing stupid sh*t like this.
Perhaps it’s to keep more freeloaders from becoming transplants
It's the same reason Trump has flip-flopped on Tik-Tok: $$$.
The wise old Flavious Hutchinson told us in his Fall of 1981 MSU business law class in McCool Hall that "in the United States of America, the law always responds to the rich and powerful, and don't you ever, ever forget it."
Obviously, I haven't forgotten it (yet).
A pic of Flavious for those who may remember him (from our MSU archives):
The wise old Flavious Hutchinson told us in his Fall of 1981 MSU business law class in McCool Hall that "in the United States of America, the law always responds to the rich and powerful, and don't you ever, ever forget it."
Obviously, I haven't forgotten it (yet).
A pic of Flavious for those who may remember him (from our MSU archives):
It's "free" money at the expense of state money that is precious. I'm not against expansion and wish they would just go ahead and do it contingent on approval of work requirements by the federal government, but it's still 20% of states that have not expanded it. It's going to draw money from other state priorities.
ETA: I also can't stand the ******** the house republicans are pulling on this. If you want to expand Medicaid, do it. If you want to expand Medicaid contingent on work requirements, do that. But don't do the ******** where you are claiming it's going to have a work requirement when you basically know for a fact that they won't be approved and you aren't requiring that they be approved.
Just the threat of expansion has completely sucked all of the life out of the willingness of the legislature to take some of the state surplus revenue and making it available to communities for infrastructure needs. It truly is a zero sum game.
Last edited:
Shouldn't have lowered the state income tax. I mean most people don't even know it happened anyway, and since it's still there and not eliminated, it's not an effective incentive to draw people into the state.
I’m not up to speed enough on the subject to have an opinion… but if his reason for not expanding is to save the federal deficit, that’s dumb.
State has to match it, and he didn't want to do that. That's the real reason. He's not opposed to federal pork.
I was in Europe not long ago and I almost died from the tyranny and lack of freedom because they have universal healthcare which is tyrannical and strips them of freedom. I'm going back soon and I hope I survive.
Anyway, Republicans don't like spending money on the poor, especially poor Dems but seem fine cutting the taxes of the super wealthy. That's really all it comes down to although some may say they have a principled stance on something because otherwise unfortunate things economically or culturally would happen if the state spent more money, even money handed over by the feds, on healthcare for poor people. Trump has already showed that old Republican positions no longer mattered once he decided to oppose them. I bet if Trump supported it then the "that ain't right cause big gubment bad" part of the Republican leadership would toe the line. Well, unless it covers vaccines.
Anyway, Republicans don't like spending money on the poor, especially poor Dems but seem fine cutting the taxes of the super wealthy. That's really all it comes down to although some may say they have a principled stance on something because otherwise unfortunate things economically or culturally would happen if the state spent more money, even money handed over by the feds, on healthcare for poor people. Trump has already showed that old Republican positions no longer mattered once he decided to oppose them. I bet if Trump supported it then the "that ain't right cause big gubment bad" part of the Republican leadership would toe the line. Well, unless it covers vaccines.
It's 90% Federal funded and only 10% state. He's not opposed to matching Federal funds. We do it literally all the time (most grants come with a matching requirement). He just hates it because it's ObamaCare.
in the words of Kurt Vonnegut: "We'll go down in history as the first society that wouldn't save itself because it wasn't cost-effective."
Great professor name!It's the same reason Trump has flip-flopped on Tik-Tok: $$$.
The wise old Flavious Hutchinson told us in his Fall of 1981 MSU business law class in McCool Hall that "in the United States of America, the law always responds to the rich and powerful, and don't you ever, ever forget it."
Obviously, I haven't forgotten it (yet).
A pic of Flavious for those who may remember him (from our MSU archives):
It's because many (most?) identify as Christians and know that Jesus wasn't serious about taking care of those less fortunate or making personal sacrifices on behalf of others. If Jesus had known there would be a nation as great as America, he would have probably said "Peter, put down your sword, unless somebody actually suggests taking care of the poor in a country named America one day. Then get behind a guy who promises to give Christians more power than they've ever had, even if that statement sounds a lot like what Satan said to me in the wilderness."***
I am not agreeing or disagreeing, but there are two lines of thinking. The first is expansion of Medicaid is one step closer to Universal Healthcare. Once every state expands then the Federal Government will offer money to expand again. Then again, then again, then again. It is a long-term plan to Universal Healthcare. Another line of thought is once every state expands then the Federal Government will cut back their portion of the expansion leaving the States on the hook for the new expansion.
Just putting out there why some think the way they think.
Only 10 states are left I think and that's declining, so it's going to eventually happen.
Yeah. Tate's fighting a battle that was lost 10 years ago. And it's hurting Mississippi's working poor.
Mississippi has the lowest “match” requirement of any state in the union, last I checked.
Tate’s denial to expand Medicaid, supposedly due to a moral stance against “welfare,” is like a movie theater not selling popcorn due to the cost of kernels.
For every dollar the state would spend, it would bring 4 times that much back into the state, at least. And the state would tax all of that additional funding flowing through the state via sales and income tax.
Meanwhile, the state dumps $200M of state taxpayer funds into UMMC annually to compensate for uncompensated / uninsured care. But apparently that’s smart spending and not “welfare”….***
Why do you think the UMMC CEO stood next to Tate in his healthcare address just prior to the election? Why was the MHA director ousted after donating funds to Tate’s opponent? Why did UMMC lead the charge to support Tate and leave the MHA?
Money. Power. Control. Votes.
Somebody should tell Republicans they don't like spending on the poor seeing as how medicaid alone is almost 10% of the federal budget and something like 1/5th of state budgets, on average (closer to 25% for Mississippi, cause republicans there extra hate the poor).
Obamacare clearly wasn't as good as advertised but I get the point. They did it so we should oppose it kind of thinking.
I'm gonna qualify for Universal Healthcare, that is, Medicare, in a few years. I'm looking forward to it.
We don't need any more reasons for poor to stay, or move to, the 'Sip. The Delta should have had a humanitarian evacuation to Atlanta in the 70s. Maybe less medicaid will prompt more poor folks to leave. It would be for their, and their descendants, own good in the long run.
That is social insurance. You pay into it. I am a few years away myself. To make Medicare work correctly, you still have to buy a supplement or an advantage plan. It's not Universal Healthcare.
Last edited:
Haley Barbour was one of the first to propose a 'State Exchange' for pooling money and rescources and saving on the cost of medical insurance. Then Obama and the Dems picked up on that and it became Obamacare and all the Republicans began hating the idea. Some state politicians may be moving beyond name-calling in health care - Mississippi Today This shows the stupidity of opposing/supporting legislation for purely political reasons.
Do we need three hospitals, Greenwood, Grenada and Why-known-er all within 30 miles of each other? Where does it end? Put the resources into the one in Grenada and let it serve all three towns.
That is the exact opposite of reality. The Medicaid expansion gives the rural hospitals the revenue they need. Not expanding is what would ensure they fold.
The purpose of Medicare is to keep the olds from voting for Universal Healthcare, which they would surely do if they only had private insurance to choose from.
85% of Medicaid dollars go to old folks home spending. MS Republicans don't mind spending on the olds. The restrictions on the poor actually getting Medicaid in MS are so ridiculous that it's a miracle that any do.
The state would be over a billion dollars better off by now if we'd bought into Medicaid expansion when it mattered. Our rural hospitals would not be failing or just be getting by, they'd be thriving and expanding. Look at those rural states that bought in at the beginning and see what their hospitals are doing now.
Tate doesn't hate the working poor, he's got no concept of work or poverty.
The fat head's had everything handed to him his whole life. He's just out to score political points.
And, yes, he's on Trump's short list for a cabinet position. So he's about to step into it on a national level. Go Tater, go!
If you are old and in a medicaid home, you somehow don't count as poor? I sure as hell wouldn't go into any nursing home that takes medicaid in Mississippi unless I had no other option.
The horrors of being expected to work or look for work if you are able and check some boxes to try to limit fraud.
Europeans pay taxes for their healthcare systems and there are also private medical practices as well and private health insurance companies. Social insurance is social welfare insurance and it's paid for by taxes.
You do realize expanding Medicaid from now until the end of 2028 is experimental....it literally costs the state of MS ZERO dollars and ZERO cents for the next 4 years....and guess what? if we dont like it, under the proposed legislation, we cancel it all together. In other words, we don't have to take an ounce of risk for the first four years to see if it works or not....
- Status
Get unlimited access today.