Health Care Reform Part IV: The Trumpening

Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by Knave, Dec 3, 2016.

Tags:
  1. Yoshou

    Yoshou Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 12, 2009
    Seattle
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I did say depending on the state, but the medicaid expansion and insurance exchange were intended to be income based. Ohio is kinda being a dick making people sell their assets, tho.
     
  2. M

    M Member+

    Feb 18, 2000
    Via Ventisette
    What Stanger posted was for the situation where someone is on both Medicare and Medicaid. I haven't found anything that says that the asset requirement in Ohio is applied to those who are solely on Medicaid. I know Kentucky (?) now has a "work" requirement for Medicaid recipients, thanks to a "waiver" from the Trump Administration.

    The income requirements for long term care on Medicaid are the case everywhere afaik.

    https://medicaid.ohio.gov/Portals/0/For Ohioans/Programs/whoQualifies/Children-Families-Adults.pdf
     
  3. M

    M Member+

    Feb 18, 2000
    Via Ventisette
    I meant "Asset requirements"...
     
  4. stanger

    stanger BigSoccer Supporter

    Nov 29, 2008
    Columbus
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Not true.

    I help people that are already on Medicaid get Medicare coverage when they turn 65 or qualify for Medicare in another way, such as becoming disabled.

    Here is a not Ohio-specific accounting of what various states consider assets and how they are assessed.

    https://www.agingcare.com/articles/asset-limits-to-qualify-for-medicaid-141681.htm

    Here is the part that does all the heavy lifting if you don't want to click on the link

    To suggest you could have unlimited assets but a low income and qualify for Medicaid is absurd.
     
  5. Yoshou

    Yoshou Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 12, 2009
    Seattle
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I think you need to re-read the article. Medicaid covers more than just health insurance. In the case of the article, it is talking about seniors using medicaid and other state/federal resources to pay for nursing home care, or in home care. In that case, you're absolutely right, there are asset limits in many states. However, that asset limit doesn't necessarily pertain to the health insurance and the extended Medicaid.

     
  6. stanger

    stanger BigSoccer Supporter

    Nov 29, 2008
    Columbus
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    ???

    Medicaid IS health insurance.

    "Ohio Medicaid programs provides a comprehensive package of services that includes preventive care for consumers. Some services are limited by dollar amount, number of visits per year, or setting in which they can be provided. You can read more about how to get these services here.

    We cover some of these services through our own programs and some are covered through your Managed Care plan. Please contact your managed care organization to understand your coverage."

    https://medicaid.ohio.gov/for-ohioans/covered-services
     
  7. Yoshou

    Yoshou Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 12, 2009
    Seattle
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    *nudge* *nudge* read my post for understanding. I very clearly said that Medicaid was health insurance. HOWEVER, Medicaid also covers MORE than just health insurance, particularly when we're talking about Seniors.

    As an example, we've been trying to get my father-in-law into a retirement community for several years, but his only source of income is Social Security and he can't afford it, so we haven't been able to. However, now he needs assisted living and part of the assistance we've been applying for is long term care through Medicaid. That part of Medicaid absolutely has asset limits.
     
    sitruc repped this.
  8. stanger

    stanger BigSoccer Supporter

    Nov 29, 2008
    Columbus
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Is that where our disconnect is? Assisted living coverage is certainly included in the definition of health insurance, at least according to the Ohio Department of Insurance which requires me to do CE on the topic every few years ;)
     
    xtomx repped this.
  9. Yoshou

    Yoshou Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 12, 2009
    Seattle
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    #5409 Yoshou, Sep 16, 2020
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2020
    I’m not sure why you are being so obtuse here.

    The article you posted was about Seniors qualifying for Medicaid and longterm care and the asset requirements it mentioned were about that. That is an entirely different ball of wax than the expanded Medicaid that Paul and I are talking about. They are two very different things and this is why I pushed back on your post.

    The Seniors qualifying for Medicaid and long term care portion of Medicaid absolutely does have asset requirements. Some states even count primary residence, which sucks if only one person in the household needs longterm care.

    However, Expanded Medicaid, as it was written in ACA, does not have asset limits. That obviously got watered down quite a bit when SCOTUS ruled that requiring states to accept expanded Medicaid was unconstitutional and certain states either refused expanded Medicaid, or would only accept it if exceptions, like asset requirements and work requirements, were included.
     
    M and sitruc repped this.
  10. stanger

    stanger BigSoccer Supporter

    Nov 29, 2008
    Columbus
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Got it.

    My knowledge of Medicaid qualification doesn't go beyond the non-elderly and I wasn't familiar with the removal of the asset requirement in the expanded states.

    It's just something I never had to deal with in any capacity.

    Sorry for the misunderstanding.

    EDIT: I did just find this as I was doing some other looking.

    "Essentially, the Medicaid expansion under the ACA will broaden Medicaid eligibility for low-income, non-elderly adults without regard to assets. A major exception for that age group are those with incomes above the threshold but with high out-of-pocket medical costs. Such individuals will be required to spend their assets down to the existing asset limit, which varies by state and is typically a few thousand dollars.

    There are a few other caveats. Existing rules, including the asset tests, will continue to apply for individuals obtaining Medicaid eligibility through another program (e.g. foster care children, or SSI/SSDI recipients) and the elderly."
     
  11. M

    M Member+

    Feb 18, 2000
    Via Ventisette
    Glad we have agreement that Ohio doesn't take assets into consideration for Medicaid eligibility for non-seniors...

    Back to Medicare. I applied in July and still don't have approval for coverage starting October 1. I know part A will be backdated from the approval date to October 1 (my first date of eligibility) but what about part B given I have to pay (crazy amounts of) money for that? Can I apply for a supplemental plan or Advantage plan absent approval? I've rung SS multiple times and all they say is it's "in progress" but could take another 60 days. Ugh.
     
  12. stanger

    stanger BigSoccer Supporter

    Nov 29, 2008
    Columbus
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Medicare is behind in their approvals for a few of my clients. It sucks because you cannot enroll in a supplemental without having start dates for both A and B and your MBI#.

    You may want to check your online account, I have seen information there that wasn't given over the phone.
     
  13. M

    M Member+

    Feb 18, 2000
    Via Ventisette
    #5413 M, Sep 17, 2020
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2020
    Thanks, I'll look.

    Do you know whether part B coverage can/is backdated to your requested start date (assuming you pay the premium) even if approval comes later?

    I could continue my ACA policy (COBRA coverage expired) but because part A coverage is backdated, I'd be on the hook for the entire premium as no subsidy would be allowed. So I don't want to do that if I then end up paying for part B concurrently as well.
     
  14. stanger

    stanger BigSoccer Supporter

    Nov 29, 2008
    Columbus
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I cannot answer that for sure. I know all Medicare plans start on the first of the month following approval, but these are unusual times as far as approval delays.

    I can try to get an answer for you if you want me to push it up the chain a bit. I may need some info you probably don’t want public, so if you do want me to look into it PM’s would be a better route.
     
    crazypete13 repped this.
  15. Q*bert Jones III

    Q*bert Jones III The People's Poet

    Feb 12, 2005
    Woodstock, NY
    Club:
    DC United
    I think we need to start trying to figure out what happens when Obamacare is struck down in the next few months.

    It's going to be absolute chaos until a public option can be legislated and implemented (which could reasonably take years.) Yanking away the healthcare of tens of millions of people while there's a pandemic raging across the word is somewhat less than optimal.
     
    song219, M, crazypete13 and 5 others repped this.
  16. dapip

    dapip Member+

    Sep 5, 2003
    South Florida
    Club:
    Millonarios Bogota
    Nat'l Team:
    Colombia
    We’ll have a better plan announced just after we’re done with the election!! It’s called platinum because is better than Obamacare!!!
     
    song219 repped this.
  17. Dr. Wankler

    Dr. Wankler Member+

    May 2, 2001
    The Electric City
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Boy, somebody really hates America.

    What part of "owning the libz" is hard for you to understand????
     
    song219 and dapip repped this.
  18. taosjohn

    taosjohn Member+

    Dec 23, 2004
    taos,nm
    No, that's his self loathing part-- the part that is unwilling to rely on his bootstraps to take care of his health...
     
  19. NGV

    NGV Member+

    Sep 14, 1999
    I don't think they'll do that (although the Democrats should certainly raise the alarm as loudly as possible). If the GOP court does take any action against the ACA, they'll probably try to figure out some way to do it that doesn't strip insurance from a large number of people in the short term.

    I also wouldn't be surprised if they don't overrule it at all. There's a big difference between preventing a program from coming into effect and eliminating one that already exists. And, if you want to preserve the preexisting condition protection and don't want to dramatically reduce access to healthcare, your options are basically Obamacare or something to the left of Obamacare. So I don't foresee a lot of appetite on the right for opening that can of worms.
     
  20. Why do you need that. We in the Netherlands don't have it and insurers arenot going bust.

    While we have insurers forced to accept anyone who wants to be insured by them.
     
  21. xtomx

    xtomx Member+

    Chicago Fire
    Sep 6, 2001
    Northern Wisconsin, but not far from civilization
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Oh, god, we have all gone over this, time and time again.
    Please give it a rest.
     
  22. NGV

    NGV Member+

    Sep 14, 1999
    My post was pretty short, so I'm not sure how you seemingly missed this part:

     
  23. Q*bert Jones III

    Q*bert Jones III The People's Poet

    Feb 12, 2005
    Woodstock, NY
    Club:
    DC United
    To be clear, they already have. They've ruled against the individual mandate. It was appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court will not, in its present form or with another conservative justice, keep the ACA. So one of two things will happen in the next few months:

    1. The Supreme Court will strike down Obamacare in its entirety
    2. The Supreme Court will specifically strike down the individual mandate and tell Congress to re-write Obamacare.
    Obamacare is dead in either case.

    Then the question becomes: how are we going to deal with tens of millions of people losing access to healthcare in the middle of a fuxking pandemic?
     
    dapip and xtomx repped this.
  24. superdave

    superdave Member+

    Jul 14, 1999
    VB, VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The mandate now has a tax penalty of zero dollars.

    That's it. That's the joke not a joke.
     
    dapip repped this.
  25. dapip

    dapip Member+

    Sep 5, 2003
    South Florida
    Club:
    Millonarios Bogota
    Nat'l Team:
    Colombia
    Told you:


     

Share This Page