Pawlenty urged to take Medicaid cash

Pawlenty urged to take Medicaid cash

There are 128 comments on the TwinCities.com story from Aug 20, 2010, titled Pawlenty urged to take Medicaid cash. In it, TwinCities.com reports that:

The Minnesota Medical Association on Friday called on Gov. Tim Pawlenty to accept $263 million in Medicaid funds that were made available to Minnesota this month by the federal government.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at TwinCities.com.

First Prev
of 7
Next Last
proof

Elk River, MN

#1 Aug 21, 2010
Obama's health care plan is already started to fail. Just remember, they promised us that our insurance rates will go down. We'll see who's right.
Smartass

Minneapolis, MN

#2 Aug 21, 2010
idiot t-paw take what we paid in you fool. as for " proof" get some facts you are another idiot.
Sarah D

Saint Paul, MN

#3 Aug 21, 2010
It's interesting to see when Pawlenty "forgets" that he's a lame duck governor.

These are funds that Minnesota needs but he wants to be sure of the future implications?

This is an EXTENSION of a program that already exists. Pawlenty is in no political danger if he signs this.

And given the fact that Pawlenty will be leaving the governor's office and running for President, political danger is all he's interested in right now.
Peter

Houston, TX

#4 Aug 21, 2010
proof wrote:
Obama's health care plan is already started to fail. Just remember, they promised us that our insurance rates will go down. We'll see who's right.
3 of 5 babies born at Houston's public hospital are anchor babies. The same trend is underway there. Medicaid spending is now 20% of the typical state's budget. With an open border, it's headed higher. No surprise here, get set for even more Medicaid spending.

Obamacare does nothing about underlying problems. We still have a balkanized insurance market with 50 state regulators. We still have an open border. We still don't have national tort reform. We still have huge numbers of people that pay nothing and consume healthcare like it's free (soon to be millions more under Obamacare). We still have others simply dinging their insurance company without regard for (or even knowledge of) costs. Both are inherently inflationary. Obamacare has no chance at all of succeeding.
Conservative Pete

Shakopee, MN

#5 Aug 21, 2010
I do NOT think he should take it. Pawlenty has enough sense to realize that any Democrat will jump on this and attack him. These Democrats are so underhanded in their dealings with our tax dollars. Enough is enough, please vote Republican in November.
Paul Bunyan

Bemidji, MN

#6 Aug 21, 2010
Insurance companies are still in charge of their rates and I have never seem them lower a rate. After they have competion they might. The path we were on was constantly rising rates, same old same old. I like the idea of changing the mix unless you like the same old same old. Obama never said rates would drop immediatly. The plan was to try to bend the inflation curve over time. The plan is to be phased in over the next 4 years, it is early to say that it has failed. We know what was happening was totally flawed and corrupt unless your an insurance exec. 60% of bankruptcy due to medical bills no other country, worth considering, has that kind of problem
Sarah D

Saint Paul, MN

#7 Aug 21, 2010
Conservative Pete wrote:
I do NOT think he should take it. Pawlenty has enough sense to realize that any Democrat will jump on this and attack him. These Democrats are so underhanded in their dealings with our tax dollars. Enough is enough, please vote Republican in November.
Why should he fear Democrats attacking him? He knows that no Democrats will ever vote for him even if he was running for dogcatcher.

Besides the next Presidential election isn't until 2012.
Paul Bunyan

Bemidji, MN

#8 Aug 21, 2010
Tpaw is such a great decision maker that he carried 1% of the Iowa voters in his latest campaign south of the border. He is pure genius on steriods. What a guy
Peter

Houston, TX

#9 Aug 21, 2010
Paul Bunyan wrote:
Insurance companies are still in charge of their rates and I have never seem them lower a rate. After they have competion they might. The path we were on was constantly rising rates, same old same old. I like the idea of changing the mix unless you like the same old same old. Obama never said rates would drop immediatly. The plan was to try to bend the inflation curve over time. The plan is to be phased in over the next 4 years, it is early to say that it has failed. We know what was happening was totally flawed and corrupt unless your an insurance exec. 60% of bankruptcy due to medical bills no other country, worth considering, has that kind of problem
Competition from what, government? That's not competition, that's facing a predator. It isn't competition when your "competitor" can endlessly lose money and use regulation against you. If it was competition they were after, they'd have simply consolidated 50 state regulators into one. Much of the market share concentration enjoyed by insurance companies is because the government has restricted competition across state lines. Pretty simple stuff.

Why would anything in Obamacare "bend the inflation curve"? He's just told millions more people that healthcare is free. Situations where people don't care about costs cause inflation. Pretty simple Econ 101 type stuff. Want lower inflation? Make connections to costs tighter, not looser.

Medical bankruptcy? This was used to scare the middle class into supporting Obamacare. But all they needed to do was to allow a national market for catastrophic healthcare insurance. You could then buy a policy to protect against the "head shot". Barring that, they could've done something like the national flood insurance plan to cover people over, say, a $50k or whatever event. But nope, that would've weakened the demand to do "something" that gave us Obamacare.

Since: Aug 09

Minneapolis, MN

#10 Aug 21, 2010
Sarah D wrote:
It's interesting to see when Pawlenty "forgets" that he's a lame duck governor.
These are funds that Minnesota needs but he wants to be sure of the future implications?
This is an EXTENSION of a program that already exists. Pawlenty is in no political danger if he signs this.
And given the fact that Pawlenty will be leaving the governor's office and running for President, political danger is all he's interested in right now.
To him, his image with Rush and FOX news is more important to him than his fellow Minnesotans. As far as future implications, he doesn't want to look like he favored anything about the Obama administration or anything to do with government involvement in health care - unless of course one of his "superiors" tells him it's OK.
Paul Bunyan

Bemidji, MN

#11 Aug 21, 2010
What does your econ 101 have to tell us about why we pay nearly twice as much for our health care as any other country? Some would go toward leading technology, but not the lion's share.
Why don't insurance companies cover all US citizens health costs? They can't make money off the worse cases so they let them go so Gov't {You&I} can pick up the tab. Same reason they don't provide Flood coverage for certain areas. They can just ignore the market and depend on the us to pick up those tabs. Seems to me that the gov't is the insurer of last resort. Seems to me that if gov't picks up some of the healtier cases that costs, on average, would fall.
As for Gov't making the rules to the game, we currently have corporations making the rules. We, You and I, are the market. Why shouldn't "we" decide what the rules are? That is a proper role for our representatives to play. Personally I get more results dealing with elected reps. than I ever had, dealing with corporations. Gov't is not perfect but they are always the final solution when corporations fail.
Peter

Houston, TX

#12 Aug 21, 2010
Paul Bunyan wrote:
What does your econ 101 have to tell us about why we pay nearly twice as much for our health care as any other country? Some would go toward leading technology, but not the lion's share.
Why don't insurance companies cover all US citizens health costs? They can't make money off the worse cases so they let them go so Gov't {You&I} can pick up the tab. Same reason they don't provide Flood coverage for certain areas. They can just ignore the market and depend on the us to pick up those tabs. Seems to me that the gov't is the insurer of last resort. Seems to me that if gov't picks up some of the healtier cases that costs, on average, would fall.
As for Gov't making the rules to the game, we currently have corporations making the rules. We, You and I, are the market. Why shouldn't "we" decide what the rules are? That is a proper role for our representatives to play. Personally I get more results dealing with elected reps. than I ever had, dealing with corporations. Gov't is not perfect but they are always the final solution when corporations fail.
We pay more than Europe for a few basic reasons. They ration and they let people die. Access is tripped up by government. Also, a huge share of what we spend is near end of life. Europe does a lot less of that. So, there's a values difference. I didn't say it's better or worse, but that's where a lot of the spend difference comes from. We're also richer. My vision correction surgery and my wife's laser treatments are in that healthcare number too.

Insurance is for risks NOT known, not risks known. Insurance companies won't insure everyone because with some people the insurance company isn't assuming RISK of claims, they're assuming claims, claims that are known ahead of time to exceed premiums. Gov't picks that up because it isn't insurance, it's subsidy and welfare (again, I didn't say it was bad, just what it is).

Your claim that government picking up healthy people would lower costs leaves me puzzled. Why? Healthy people just get moved around and somehow costs fall?

We do decide the rules if the government makes sure there's a market. But now, government regulates insurance one state at a time. You can live in Superior, WI and government forbids you buying a policy that's available in Duluth. That's incredibly destructive to competition and it's competition that puts you in control. Obamacare did NOTHING to fix this simple and obvious problem.

Think about government and then think about companies. Companies adapt, governments don't. The examples are countless. Look at the fossilized post office. Look at PBS. The government started it when there were few choices. Now hundreds of channels exist and the subsidies continue like nothing has happened. Obamacare is a mess from the start. Now take everything you know about how society and what we want and need in a healthcare system will change in 10 years and think about the likelihood of your government keeping Obamacare relevant and current. It won't happen. The failure will grow not diminish.
Education Dept

United States

#13 Aug 21, 2010
Conservative Pete wrote:
I do NOT think he should take it. Pawlenty has enough sense to realize that any Democrat will jump on this and attack him. These Democrats are so underhanded in their dealings with our tax dollars. Enough is enough, please vote Republican in November.
I feel dumb after reading your post. Is there anything you care about other than sounding like a fool?
Paul Bunyan

Bemidji, MN

#14 Aug 21, 2010
I have less confidence in corporations than I have in government. My auto insurance rises at 10%+ per year, health goes about 20%. I have clean records for both and pay them myself as I'm self-employed. If my taxes did that I would join the tea party but why do we just accept it from corporations. I see that they do adapt but only to make more money for themselves not to help their customers. They post ever-higher profits at the expense of the customers. No shame in gouging for more profits. that is a formula that Enron played to the end and others have learned, now it seems to be the standard for corporations. I have no trust in companies.
Ann

Minneapolis, MN

#16 Aug 21, 2010
Tim should not take this money. If he wants to be President in 2012, he must not do this.
Get Real

South Saint Paul, MN

#17 Aug 21, 2010
Ann wrote:
Tim should not take this money. If he wants to be President in 2012, he must not do this.
Yes, he would forfeit $263 million worth of healthcare for his personal ambitions. He's a sick, cruel, narcissistic scumbag.
binar

Mankato, MN

#18 Aug 21, 2010
He first needs to see what how much of his precious time it will take, weigh it by how much he can steal from it B4 deciding if he should do anything. If it does not benefit him or his, he just doesn't care. I hate the fact that he is even breathing up my oxygen.

Since: Aug 10

Here

#19 Aug 21, 2010
Education Dept wrote:
<quoted text> I feel dumb after reading your post. Is there anything you care about other than sounding like a fool?
Your name is "Education Dept" and you called someone else A FOOL... HIGHLARIOUS.

Since: Aug 10

Here

#20 Aug 21, 2010
binar wrote:
He first needs to see what how much of his precious time it will take, weigh it by how much he can steal from it B4 deciding if he should do anything. If it does not benefit him or his, he just doesn't care. I hate the fact that he is even breathing up my oxygen.
Precious time..... like the 5 months the entire Democrat party took to hand in a budget to him... with blanks?
Peter

Houston, TX

#21 Aug 21, 2010
Paul Bunyan wrote:
I have less confidence in corporations than I have in government. My auto insurance rises at 10%+ per year, health goes about 20%. I have clean records for both and pay them myself as I'm self-employed. If my taxes did that I would join the tea party but why do we just accept it from corporations. I see that they do adapt but only to make more money for themselves not to help their customers. They post ever-higher profits at the expense of the customers. No shame in gouging for more profits. that is a formula that Enron played to the end and others have learned, now it seems to be the standard for corporations. I have no trust in companies.
Your confidence in government is severely misplaced. No company cares about its customers; they care about their owners. But caring about their owners means caring about you if they're to survive in a competitive world. Did Apple make the I-phone because they were on some humanitarian mission? No, they did it for their shareholders. Seriously though, where in the world did you get the idea that government is looking out for you? That's truly laughable.

Interesting that you mention auto insurance. If gasoline, oil changes, tires, diagnostics, and repairs were included in insurance and you had no worries that your claims would drive future individual coverage hikes, you'd have a good analogy to what we do with healthcare insurance. Much of what comes under health insurance isn't insurance. Insurance is for risks, for what MIGHT happen, not for what WILL happen. In healthcare, people pay for a policy and then expect to plug the insurance company for something beyond the premiums including routine and obvious costs. Imagine what gasoline would cost if you just swiped an insurance card and didn't have a care about cost (or even know the cost). Gasoline prices would experience inflation. Maybe you're different, but most people with healthcare insurance couldn't care less what tests or treatments they agree to as long as the insurance company pays. Hell, they don't even bother to know the costs. That's inherently inflationary. Obamcare did NOTHING to deal with these underlying drivers and principles.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 7
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.

Minnesota Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Jeronimo Yanez, Minnesota officer in Philando C... 16 hr slick willie expl... 37
Lake Superior agate people out there? (Apr '06) Jun 19 Joe 297
News Let's help seniors, disabled (Mar '15) Jun 18 Anonymous 4
News Minnesota Senate approves use of medical marijuana (Apr '09) Jun 16 SLICK PUTZ PENCE 127
Women-Only Minnesota Permit to Carry Class Lake... Jun 12 EQUIP2CONCEALCLASS 1
News Lyme Disease Cases Growing in Minnesota Jun 4 Kel 2
News Solar incentive program in cross hairs this leg... Jun 4 Land of Lakes 2
More from around the web