Linda, in asking about "Red States governors turn down federal monies for their people for things like health care. Why would they do that?" I would reply that I think it's because for much of that federal money, (Medicaid money?) the states have to supply the other half of the money, that the money isn't entirely free without state obli…
Linda, in asking about "Red States governors turn down federal monies for their people for things like health care. Why would they do that?" I would reply that I think it's because for much of that federal money, (Medicaid money?) the states have to supply the other half of the money, that the money isn't entirely free without state obligation to match it. One assumes that for red states it is more important to NOT go along with programs created by blue politicians which benefit actual people. Perverse as is much among the Rethuglicans these days.
My understanding is that the state pays 10% the federal government 90%, so it seems like this saves the states money, because the costs of uninsured must be greater.
If a politician is in government because they want to do good, then they would be supporting it. However, Republicans seem to have bought into the uncivilized idea that it is not the job of the government to support the well-being of the people. If the USA is not to be like Russia, people need to get out on the streets and protest more. Also, fight against these right-to-work oxymoronic laws.
Linda, in asking about "Red States governors turn down federal monies for their people for things like health care. Why would they do that?" I would reply that I think it's because for much of that federal money, (Medicaid money?) the states have to supply the other half of the money, that the money isn't entirely free without state obligation to match it. One assumes that for red states it is more important to NOT go along with programs created by blue politicians which benefit actual people. Perverse as is much among the Rethuglicans these days.
My understanding is that the state pays 10% the federal government 90%, so it seems like this saves the states money, because the costs of uninsured must be greater.
https://www.kff.org/medicaid/issue-brief/how-many-uninsured-are-in-the-coverage-gap-and-how-many-could-be-eligible-if-all-states-adopted-the-medicaid-expansion/#:~:text=This%20incentive%20does%20not%20apply,65%20plus%20or%20disability)%3B
This work requirement seems cruel and is just cruel, and removing a lot of people from eligibility.
https://www.kff.org/medicaid/issue-brief/tough-tradeoffs-under-republican-work-requirement-plan-some-people-lose-medicaid-or-states-could-pay-to-maintain-coverage/
If a politician is in government because they want to do good, then they would be supporting it. However, Republicans seem to have bought into the uncivilized idea that it is not the job of the government to support the well-being of the people. If the USA is not to be like Russia, people need to get out on the streets and protest more. Also, fight against these right-to-work oxymoronic laws.