Illegals Get Healthcare; Citizens Do Not

Illegals Get Healthcare; Citizens Do Not

Posted in the Columbus Forum

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#1 Jan 28, 2013
http://tinyurl.com/a8he2z6

"Aliens Get Healthcare, Citizens Do Not – A Quirk – Unintended Consequences? No, It’s the Obama Agenda: Impeach John Roberts"

The AP calls it an ObamaCare "quirk...unintended consequences." I call it the Obama agenda of grinding down America. Arizona Governor Jan Brewer recently made news when she opted-in for a greatly expanded Medicaid under ObamaCare (which will eventually bankrupt the state -- my words, not hers).

"If Arizona does not expand, for poor Arizonans below (the federal poverty line), only legal immigrants, but not citizens, would be eligible for subsidies," the documents said.

Now here is something else we can lay squarely on the shoulders of Supreme Court Justice John Roberts:

Starting Jan. 1, 2014, the health care law will offer health insurance to millions of people now uninsured. Middle-class uninsured people will be able to get taxpayer-subsidized private policies through new markets called exchanges. Low-income uninsured people will be steered to Medicaid, a government program jointly funded by Washington and the states.

Under previous laws, legal immigrants have to wait five (5) years to qualify for Medicaid. Ng’andu said Hispanic advocacy groups wanted to lift that restriction during the 2009 congressional health care debate, but couldn’t get political support. The Medicaid waiting period remained in place, but a compromise was reached that would allow low-income legal immigrants to get subsidized private coverage in the new health insurance exchanges.

The health care law expanded Medicaid to cover millions of low-income adults who are ineligible under current rules. As written, the law assumed that every state would accept the Medicaid expansion, with Washington paying for most of it. So the law stipulated that people below the federal poverty line --$11,170 for a single person; $23,050 for a family of four (4)-- could not get subsidies for private coverage in the exchanges. Medicaid was to be their only option.

Legal immigrants here for less than five (5) years remained an exception.

Along came the Supreme Court. It upheld Obama’s law, but ruled that states were free to accept or reject the Medicaid expansion. The court did not touch the issue of coverage for legal immigrants in the health insurance exchanges. That provision remained in place.

And that’s how the immigration glitch came to be.
Poor people in a state that turns down Obama’s Medicaid expansion can only get government subsidized coverage if they are legal immigrants.
U.S. citizens are out of luck.(Source: Daily Herald)

America changed forever with Justice John Roberts’ decision on the legality of ObamaCare.
Today he enjoys the public adoration of Liberals in Washington, D.C.
I bet he drinks Cosmos.
He should carry the shame to his grave (and no, I’m not wishing him dead).

“Meh.”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#2 Jan 28, 2013
How did you work out the title for this thread as "Illegals get healthcare; citizens do not" while the body of the text shows the loophole coving legal, non citizen migrants?

Is there a part of the article you've not included that demonstrates your claim?

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#3 Jan 28, 2013
tranpsosition wrote:
How did you work out the title for this thread as "Illegals get healthcare; citizens do not" while the body of the text shows the loophole coving legal, non citizen migrants?
Is there a part of the article you've not included that demonstrates your claim?
No...it was a typo. But, we all know that fraud is rampant within the system and that ineligible people receive taxpayer-funded benefits every day. Further, your correction does not erase the fact that "legal" immigrants will receive taxpayer-funded benefits denied to U.S. citizens.

Worse, as soon as the WH/Congress pushes through their current amnesty proposal...MILLIONS of "suddenly-legal illegals" will immediately be eligible for these and other taxpayer-funded benefits.

Make no mistake...U.S. citizens are being gouged daily in the wake of destruction left by the progressive agenda.
hey now now

Columbus, OH

#4 Jan 28, 2013
I wonder what obama blackmailed Roberts with?

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#5 Jan 28, 2013
http://www.cis.org/edwards/obamacare-loophole...

Obamacare Loopholes May Benefit Illegals at Taxpayer Expense

by James R. Edwards Jr.

The Los Angeles Times recently reported on program known as ROC-MD in Southern California that provides a form of health coverage designed for illegal aliens.

The program was started by the Restaurant Opportunities Center of L.A. and St. John's Well Child and Family Center. Uninsured illegals are charged $25 a month and can seek medical services at one of the St. John's clinics.

This program targets illegal aliens because they ostensibly don't qualify for coverage through Obamacare. However, the law already had some loopholes through which illegal aliens could tap taxpayer-funded health care.

One potential loophole is if the partner clinics receive federal or state funds as a community health center. Those dollars would conceivably subsidize illegals' treatment. Also, if the facilities collect Medicaid, Children's Health Insurance Program, or other welfare monies, the fact the funds are fungible exposes taxpayers to paying for a portion of the services the ROC-MD illegals receive. It's hard to believe $25 a month would fully cover the services one might demand.

This program also highlights a flaw in Obamacare. The law excludes illegal aliens from the federal mandate requiring individuals to buy health coverage or else be penalized. It also continues the law forcing medical providers to provide "emergency" services, regardless of one's ability to pay.

Thus, illegal aliens, including those participating in ROC-MD, could pay peanuts for low-cost, basic care at a community health center, yet still get big-ticket medical care for "free" at an emergency room — courtesy of John Q. Taxpayer, who either has government-mandated health insurance, has been forced into Medicaid, or pays a severe fine for foregoing coverage. So, John Q. is taxed for himself and for illegal aliens' health care. That leaves illegal aliens as "free riders" under the "reformed" health care regime.

There is also the prospect of ID fraud enabling some illegal aliens to "auto-enroll" in the new "exchanges" created by the health reform law....

“Meh.”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#6 Jan 28, 2013
So you're outraged that legal immigrants are receiving benefit while citizens do not.

For this, you are angry at "the progressive agenda" even though the exclusion of American citizens for this program is due to the express act of the Brewer, who passed on the expansion?

Even after the typo is corrected, I'm not entirely sure your quiet rage is well directed.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#7 Jan 28, 2013
tranpsosition wrote:
So you're outraged that legal immigrants are receiving benefit while citizens do not.
For this, you are angry at "the progressive agenda" even though the exclusion of American citizens for this program is due to the express act of the Brewer, who passed on the expansion?
Even after the typo is corrected, I'm not entirely sure your quiet rage is well directed.
Re-read the article for clarity.

Gov. Brewer felt forced to agree to the expansion...for this exact reason:

"If Arizona does not expand, for poor Arizonans below (the federal poverty line), only legal immigrants, but not citizens, would be eligible for subsidies."

How absurd.

“Meh.”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#8 Jan 28, 2013
Ah, so there's actually no problem at all?

Rather than have a rather strange loophole provide selective coverage, everyone will get coverage due to the contrast this loophole would provide.

Seems pretty win-win, if more folks living below the poverty line are getting access to preventative care!

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#9 Jan 28, 2013
tranpsosition wrote:
Ah, so there's actually no problem at all?
Rather than have a rather strange loophole provide selective coverage, everyone will get coverage due to the contrast this loophole would provide.
Seems pretty win-win, if more folks living below the poverty line are getting access to preventative care!
You're not a big picture kinda gal...and a socialist, to boot.
Wouldn't expect you to comprehend states' rights issues versus the strong arm of the federal government.

“Meh.”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#10 Jan 28, 2013
It seems fairly clear that the states retain the right to refuse expansion while the loophole prevents them from barring legal immigrants for whom program participation would fall under federal federal administration from participation in the expansion.

Could you talk a bit more about how you feel this creates a conflict re: states rights?
Spookhere F trolls

Taylor, MI

#11 Jan 28, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
You're not a big picture kinda gal...and a socialist, to boot.
Wouldn't expect you to comprehend states' rights issues versus the strong arm of the federal government.
Lead to the head of an invader cures all their ailments

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#12 Jan 28, 2013
tranpsosition wrote:
It seems fairly clear that the states retain the right to refuse expansion while the loophole prevents them from barring legal immigrants for whom program participation would fall under federal federal administration from participation in the expansion.
Could you talk a bit more about how you feel this creates a conflict re: states rights?
Obviously, you are incapable of understanding.

“Meh.”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#13 Jan 28, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
Obviously, you are incapable of understanding.
No, I'm quite interested to hear how the inability to bar state residents from federally administered programs while retaining the right to bar residents and citizens from the development of further state administered programs is a states rights issue!

Give it a shot!

You got through, what, high school? You can contribute more than name calling and cut and paste. Join the conversation. Teach me what you know.
Anon

Crestline, OH

#14 Jan 28, 2013
tranpsosition wrote:
Ah, so there's actually no problem at all?
Rather than have a rather strange loophole provide selective coverage, everyone will get coverage due to the contrast this loophole would provide.
Seems pretty win-win, if more folks living below the poverty line are getting access to preventative care!
And more middle class folks/working poor won't be able to afford it? What win-win? Besides which, preventative care is screening, not care; thus, when an illness is found it still can be unaffordable.

“Meh.”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#15 Jan 28, 2013
Anon wrote:
<quoted text>
And more middle class folks/working poor won't be able to afford it? What win-win? Besides which, preventative care is screening, not care; thus, when an illness is found it still can be unaffordable.
It includes subsidies on preventative and general care. While emergency care services have long been available in the US (granted, often with bankruptcies attached to them) I'm really interested to see what the development of preventative care, specifically can do for mortality rates and general health in the US. It's not the only form of care being expanded, just the type I'm personally most interested in. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#16 Jan 28, 2013
tranpsosition wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I'm quite interested to hear how the inability to bar state residents from federally administered programs while retaining the right to bar residents and citizens from the development of further state administered programs is a states rights issue!
Give it a shot!
You got through, what, high school? You can contribute more than name calling and cut and paste. Join the conversation. Teach me what you know.
Doesn't take much for you to go full juvenile, does it?

Your posts prove you are nothing but a self-important, leftist blowhard content to suck at the teat of the coercive state.
Anon

Crestline, OH

#17 Jan 28, 2013
tranpsosition wrote:
<quoted text>
It includes subsidies on preventative and general care. While emergency care services have long been available in the US (granted, often with bankruptcies attached to them) I'm really interested to see what the development of preventative care, specifically can do for mortality rates and general health in the US. It's not the only form of care being expanded, just the type I'm personally most interested in. Sorry if that wasn't clear.
No, it includes tax credits for the premiums for the lowest coverages only. Those tax credits will need to be paid back if you see a change in circumstances. Meanwhile, you are still responsible for the high deductibles and 30-40% that your insurance won't cover. I'll tell you what someone in Massachusetts said: We still can't afford it and it takes a month to get an appointment so we go to the ER. Additionally, new guidelines are reducing some types of screening - such as PAPs and mammograms. And there will be cost-shifting from those with insurance to provide for those who get "subsidies".

“Hi-Yo Silver! Away!”

Since: Aug 12

Location hidden

#18 Jan 28, 2013
tranpsosition wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I'm quite interested to hear how the inability to bar state residents from federally administered programs while retaining the right to bar residents and citizens from the development of further state administered programs is a states rights issue!
Give it a shot!
You got through, what, high school? You can contribute more than name calling and cut and paste. Join the conversation. Teach me what you know.
Tip has proven over and over in his head 1+2 =-7.5 He's a few tacos short of a combo plate, his elevator doesn't go to the top floor, and he's not the brightest bulb in the pack. Let him post his nonsense, but don't get sucked into it.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#19 Jan 28, 2013
Kemosahbe wrote:
<quoted text>
Tip has proven over and over in his head 1+2 =-7.5 He's a few tacos short of a combo plate, his elevator doesn't go to the top floor, and he's not the brightest bulb in the pack. Let him post his nonsense, but don't get sucked into it.
Ahh...a new personality emerges, as I don't recall Sterling Silver, Modern Man, The Author or Kemosahbe having much of a sense of humor.

Welcome to your special group.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#20 Jan 28, 2013
tranpsosition wrote:
How did you work out the title for this thread as "Illegals get healthcare; citizens do not" while the body of the text shows the loophole coving legal, non citizen migrants?
Is there a part of the article you've not included that demonstrates your claim?
Some folks have a difficult time distinguishing between legal and illegal immigrants.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Columbus Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Wasserman Info Mother Load | WTF???? 6 min Reality 160
August 21 - When it All Hits the Fan 1 hr Dan Rather Not 114
de Facto Trump KKK Grand Imperial Wizard 5 hr Alt facts speak a... 19
Dems in disarray- Well, yeah! 5 hr Alternative Facts... 1,272
Democratic voter base declines 6 hr Alternative Facts... 9
Tecumseh the prophet 6 hr Ricardo montobomb 3
Tecumseh the prophet 6 hr Ricardo montobomb 7

Columbus Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Columbus Mortgages