It's too bad so many people liked Sandy's comment now that it's become a talking point to refute what the GOP is doing. It isn't true though. The Obamacare expansion made Medicaid income-based, so if you're poor you qualify. Doesn't matter if you work or have dependents. And this is a good thing.
I think Sandy means well, but is misinformed.
Most red states have not expanded Medicaid so very few people actually qualify, certainly not able bodied low income people without dependents. Florida is a good example. Very limited eligibility. www.healthinsurance.org/medicaid/flo...
only 7 states(yes, all red ones) have not expanded it.
Isn’t it 10, with 9 being red states? ( if Kansas is red) www.kff.org/status-of-st...
Some of those have done partial expansions, which might be the discrepancy between our numbers. I think if we define the state “color” by presidential choice (which is a lousy shorthand to summarize a state, but common one), they’d all be considered red at the moment.
But to the folks on top it's bad because income based should mean only their income level can afford it. Otherwise they can't own more homes than their parents and will be seen as failures for generations.
The whole point of these new GOP restrictions on Medicaid is to find ways to kick people off in order to fund tax cuts for the rich. So if these restrictions didn't apply to anyone, like is claimed, their plan wouldn't make any sense as it wouldn't get them any money that way.
I think they would be happy to kick people off healthcare programs even if it didn't involve funding tax breaks. It's a matter of principle for them that poor people don't deserve any form of support.
I honestly doubt it because millions of poor MAGA voters are going to lose health care due to this, and that's one of the most surefire ways to create pissed-off voters for the 2026 midterms. They're taking that huge gamble regardless because they're so fixated on passing tax cuts for the rich.
They’re giving states until after the midterms to make most of the changes that will start winnowing people off the programs.
It's very cynical. They're basically hoping their own voters are too dumb to connect the dots.
They know states won’t be eager to make these changes any faster than they have to.
And the 'fiscal Conservatives' will increase the debt by $4.5trn. They're spewing the usual bs about the trickle down effects of the tax cuts for the very rich. The same 'trick' they invented during the Reagan years.
Every "fiscally conservative" Republican president dating back to at least Reagan has either doubled or tripled ~~ BOTH ~~ the debt and the deficit. Every single one.
Yes. But as the Trump administration is being consistently reminded in court & trying to evade, Congress controls spending. We don’t want administrations simply defunding programs they don’t like & they legally can’t transfer appropriated funds to some other department’s programs they like more.
Yup 👍 Reminds me of the Al Franken book "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them"
Been saying trickle down is like being pissed on since they first flew that ignorant plan
👍
“They should die, and reduce the surplus population” — Ebenezer Scrooge
In Alabama? I live in FL and thanks to Rick Scott, we were never able to take advantage of the Medicaid expansion benefit. Was Alabama?
It's illustrative a particular flaw in social media. The post is factually incorrect and easily fact-checked but remains up even after several people have pointed this out, presumably because it's getting likes. So false information spreads and the truth is ignored.
