Medican't - "Taker" States

  • Aired:  10/10/13
  •  | Views: 120,416

If statehood was health care, moocher states like Mississippi and Missouri would be rejected as having a preexisting condition. (3:34)

NOW YOU ARE PROBABLYTHINKING, JON, THIS IS SO

ABSTRACT WITH THESE NUMBERS.

CAN YOU SHOW ME WHAT YOU'RETALKING ABOUT?

MAYBE WITH AN EXAMPLE FROMTHE SHOW ME STATE, MISSOURI.

>> 45-YEAR-OLD BERTHAMcINTYRE NEEDS DAILY

MEDICATION.

SHE DOES NOT QUALIFY FORMEDICAID IN MISSOURI BECAUSE

HER FAMILY INCOME IS TOOHIGH, ABOUT $1200 A MONTH.

>> WELL AIN'T SHE FANCY!

WHAT, WITH HER CLOTHES ANDSHELTER.

SEE THAT WOMAN IS CONSIDEREDTOO RICH FOR MEDICAID, BUT

TOO POOR FOR THE OBAMACARESUBSIDIES TO HAVE AN

EFFECT.

YES, THAT'S HOW MUCH SENSETHIS ALL MAKES.

SO WHY NOT EXPAND MEDICAID,MISSOURI.

>> REPUBLICAN STATE SENATORJOHN LAMPING ARGUES MISSOURI

FACES TOUGH CHOICES.

>> THE ENTIRE COST OFMEDICAID IN MISSOURI IS

ONE-THIRD OF MISSOURI'SBUDGET.

WE CAN BARELY AFFORD TO BEIN THE MEDICAID PROGRAM AS

IT EXISTS TODAY.

>> Jon: BOY, THIS IS A TOUGHCHOICE.

SHOULD WE AS A STATE ACCEPT100% OF THIS PROGRAM'S

EXPANSION COSTS FROM THEFEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR THE FIRST

THREE YEARS OR I DON'TKNOW-- [BLEEP] IT?

BUT IT IS A TOUGH CHOICE.

WHAT ARE SOME OF THE TOUGHCHOICES YOUR CITIZENS ARE

MAKING?

>> AM I GOING TO TAKE FOODOUT OF A CHILD'S STOMACH OR

AM I GOING DO WITHOUT GOING TOTHE DOCTOR, WHICH WOULD YOU

CHOOSE?

>> HERE'S THE BEST PART.

THESE GOVERNORS ANDLEGISLATURES WHO REFUSE TO

ACCEPT FEDERAL DOLLARS TOEXPAND MEDICAID FOR PEOPLE

LIKE THAT NICE LADY, ALL BUTTHREE OF THOSE 26 STATES

THEY REPRESENT ALREADY TAKEMORE MONEY FROM THE FEDERAL

GOVERNMENT THAN THEYCONTRIBUTE IN TAX DOLLARS.

THEY ARE ALREADY BURDENS ONTHE SYSTEM.

I BELIEVE THEY'RE REFERREDTO BY THOSE REPUBLICANS AS

MOOCHERS.

MOOCHER STATES.

AND IF STATEHOOD WAS HEALTHCARE, MISSISSIPPI AND

MISSOURI WOULD BE REJECTEDAS HAVING THAT AS A

PREEXISTING CONDITION.

SO YOU MAY BE THINKING TOYOURSELF, SO WHAT DO THESE

UNINSURED PEOPLE DO FORHEALTH CARE.

WELL, REPUBLICANS ACTUALLYHAD THAT COVERED IN THE LAST

PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.

NOT SURE HOW THAT WORKEDOUT.

>> WELL, WE DO PROVIDE CAREFOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T

HAVE INSURANCE.

PEOPLE, IF SOMEONE HAS AHEART ATTACK, THEY DON'T SIT

IN THEIR APARTMENT AND DIE.

WE PICK THEM UP IN AAMBULANCE AND TAKE THEM TO

THE HOSPITAL AND GIVE THEMCARE.

>> Jon: HISTORICAL FOOTNOTEIS RIGHT.

YOU CAN ALWAYS GO TO THEEMERGENCY ROOM.

YOU CAN ALWAYS GO TO THEEMERGENCY ROOM WHEN YOU'RE

HAVING A HEART ATTACKAND APPARENTLY THEY THINK

THAT'S THE FISCALLYRESPONSIBLE OPTION RATHER

THAN EXPANDSING MEDICAID,BECAUSE UNLIKE OBAMACARE, WE

ALL KNOW ER VISITS ARE FREE!

JUST ONE LITTLE PROBLEM.

>> WHEN THE UNINSURED END UPHERE IN THE ER, THEIR COSTS

ARE PASSED ON TO PAYINGCUSTOMERS.

THAT MEANS INSURANCECOMPANIES END UP PAYING MORE

SO THEY RAISE RATES.

AND FEWER PEOPLE CAN AFFORDHEALTH INSURANCE.

>> THE IMPACT TO OURHOSPITAL DISTRICT IS $52

MILLION A YEAR.

HAD WE EXPANDED MEDICAID, WEWOULD HAVE GOT THAT 52

MILLION FROM THE FEDERALGOVERNMENT INSTEAD WE'RE

GETTING FROM LOCAL TAXPAYERS.

>> Jon: GOT IT?

MEDICAL CARE FOR THEUNINSURED HAS ALREADY

BALLOONED THE COST OF THESYSTEM.

THIS IS AN ATTEMPT TO GAINCONTROL OF THOSE COSTS.

SO IF YOU HAVE A BETTERANSWER, REPUBLICANS, LET'S

[BLEEP] HEAR IT!

BUT DON'T MAKE YOUR PLAN,WHAT DO WE NEED FOOD STAMPS

FOR WHEN WE ALREADY HAVEDINE AND DASH.

WE'LL BE RIGHT BACK.

(CHEERS AND APPLAUSE)

Loading...