Is THIS Why NH Democrats Want to Expand Medicaid So Badly...? - Granite Grok

Is THIS Why NH Democrats Want to Expand Medicaid So Badly…?

medicade- Looks refreshing, but always comes back to haunt you laterAre rules in the ACA that punish older married couples designed to drive them to divorce so that they end up on Medicaid,  so that the government can then fleece their estates after death?  It is starting to look that way.

Medicaid (the government/States) can charge the estate of a deceased Medicaid recipient to recover costs of care incurred prior to death before survivors may then distribute any remaining property or savings.  But most current recipients do not have much in the way of property for the state to confiscate.  If you are erecting a massive Health Care edifice, you’re going to need more cash to pay for it.  So what do you do?

You write rules into your partisan legislation that drive people into a program that then creates revenue streams without people necessarily realizing it.  That program?  Medicaid Expansion.

Thanks to ObamaCare,  Medicaid expansion makes Medicaid available to people who have higher incomes– older people who might not be eligible for credits or might not be able to afford the ObamaCare premiums and could be driven to Medicaid.  Note that most ACA sign ups are people lining up for Expanded medicaid?  This is probably not a coincidence.   There are  people who by law must have coverage, and probably need it, but who, unlike the past majority of medicaid users… are more likley to have property.

So what do you do if you are a Democrat?

You bribe/threaten the states into expanding Medicaid as a way to backdoor fund your leviathan health care plan.  When the Supreme Court says you can’t, you cajole, pressure, pry, and intimidate them into doing it through state parties, local Democrats, OFA, moronic-water-carrying-business associations, and the donkey-herd of so-called non-profits cluttering up the political neighborhood.  (Sometimes you can even convince Republicans it’s a good idea.)

Once you get Medicaid ‘Expanded’ you can use medicaid rules to…seize the property of recipients to ‘cover costs,’ which in the long term will probably greatly exceed the original inducement to expand in the first place.

RS

Is your state one that seizes assets of deceased Medicaid patients? Do they know about the problem? Do they even care? – Because there’s money in this, for those states that were dumb enough to sign up for Obamacare’s expanded Medicaid provisions. There’s potentially a lot of money. Or at least enough to keep the whole thing from crashing immediately, once the federal government cuts its contributions to state Medicaid programs.

I’m not sure if New Hampshire is or would enforce such a provision, or if they would stop the feds from enforcing one, but someone had damn well better find out.  And if expansion cannto be stopped, there had best be some serious protections in place.

 

In review

I think it is important to remind everyone (again) that the ACA deliberately punishes older married couples who would own property but might not be wealthy enough to afford the massive premium increases that would occur if they remained married.   The ACA by design actually favors them getting divorced in their 60’s to avoid these mandated and crippling costs.

Once divorced, with property divided or shared out of wedlock, each would still need insurance and the only option left to them is Medicaid.  The ACA  rules have now driven them into Medicaid, and turned them into dependents of the government.

But why do that?  Why punish older couples who have shared lives and property for decades and honored the idea of marriage into their senior years?  Couples who could get by together without needing expanded government assistance?

Well, when they pass away, something government healthcare will likley accelerate if left in place, their property could then be claimed to “cover costs incurred” by the government for “free health care coverage” denying that property to the survivors of the deceased.

The state and Federal government could get first dibs on the property of an increasing number of enrollees intentionally forced into Medicaid by partisan Democrat legislation.

It would be like a double death tax, or just a new death tax, even in places or under financial circumstances where a death tax would not otherwise apply.  People on Medicaid of some small means would have their remaining wealth, or at least some portion of it,  redistributed to the government.

I think New Hampshire legislators, more than a few Republicans included, need to drill down into the ACA rules for Medicaid expansion again, and further, before they even consider reevaluating medicaid expansion in New Hampshire.  They could be instituting a massive, state wide, death tax, and not even know it.

Well Played evil Democrats.  Well Played.

Now let us see if we can out-play them, shall we?

>