KY Gov. Matt Bevin to Overhaul Medicaid and Scrap Kynect

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Stupid ass people.

Sorry, but everyone has different top issues, and there is no "truly intelligent" way to do it. I could just as easily refer to you as stupid for not caring about "innocent human lives" or the "moral fabric of society", and it would be just as pathetic and superficial of an argument as you have just given above.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Bevin has already made it legal statewide to not list the county clerk's name on a marriage license, and it's possible that he would try to make it legal for any county clerk office to pull a Kim Davis, by taking away the requirement for such offices to issue licenses, potentially forcing same-sex couples to travel across the state - or even out-of-state - to get licenses. However, getting that through the house will be difficult, so he could do instead what North Carolina and Utah have done - allow someone to refuse to issue a marriage license, but require them to designate some other qualified person in the county to issue such licenses instead.

But there is of course no way for him to outright prohibit Same-Sex marriage.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Bevin has already made it legal statewide to not list the county clerk's name on a marriage license, and it's possible that he would try to make it legal for any county clerk office to pull a Kim Davis, by taking away the requirement for such offices to issue licenses, potentially forcing same-sex couples to travel across the state - or even out-of-state - to get licenses. However, getting that through the house will be difficult, so he could do instead what North Carolina and Utah have done - allow someone to refuse to issue a marriage license, but require them to designate some other qualified person in the county to issue such licenses instead.

But there is of course no way for him to outright prohibit Same-Sex marriage.

I don't understand why this wasn't the solution at the very beginning.  If someone objects to their name being on the document for religious reasons, just have a law that gives someone else the authority to step in.  If all qualified officials in the county object, then bring in an official from another county who does not object and reimburse their travel.  Don't compel the couple to travel to a different jurisdiction.  IDK why this would be so hard or controversial. 

Well, at least under what has been passed in NC/UT, the clerk/probate judge must name/direct the couple to the alternate issuer, so I guess the Kim Davis's of the state could view that as "assisting in committing a sin."

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Just to put this thread back on track:

But even after all of the changes, KY will still be part of the expanded Medicaid program, just using a different form via waivers (like IN, MT, AR, IA, NH and MI).   The number of states not expanding Medicaid under ACA is down to 20, once Obama is out of office (and once Hillary is probably elected), I think they will slowly but surely take the money.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Amidst the wailing, this is the key story that everyone seems to have forgotten. 

I don't understand - I thought the states had to adopt the expansion because after 2019 or so (?), they had to help pay for more of it, while right now they don't. How can the people get the benefits without the state adopting it? Every media outlet that reports on this issue at one point or another mentions the large numbers of people who can't get coverage due to the state not adopting it, but if what you guys are saying is true, then really everyone is wrong and misstating the issue.

I don't know much about this, so I'm just wondering why states have done anything regarding this if more people can already get the coverage regardless.

Under the original law, all states were indeed required to take the expansion eventually, but that provision was struck down by the supreme court, which ruled that states had to be allowed to decide. It didn't get a lot of publicity at the time because it was tucked into the same decision that upheld the individual mandate, but it did happen. What is still in the law is, eventually, those states that are taking the expansion will have to pay for (almost all of) it themselves, while right now the feds are helping to cover a significant part of the cost. States that don't take the expansion don't get that part of the law's benefits, of course, but there is nothing in the law that says the state has to take that specific part of the law's benefits. It's just like creating a state exchange - beneficial if your state does it, but there's nothing illegal under the law about them refusing to do so.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

And the 10 percent is only for people who are covered by expansion. Original Medicaid patients like children and the elderly are still paid for by the traditional cost sharing model.  Literally no good reason to reject expansion, which is something right wing nutjob apologists like Wulfric can't wrap his head around.

I'm sorry if I came off as opposing expansion above, I don't. I've always been very clear that I support ObamaCare, including the mandates and subsidies. Are there changes I would make to the law if I was dictator of the U.S.? Yes. But do I support most of the bill? Yes.

And seriously, right wing nutjob apologist? I've made it pretty clear that I am generally (significantly) to the left of the Republican base on entitlements and fiscal/economic issues and way to the left on Foreign Policy. Even on social issues there are differences - I support Marijuana legalization and am not an apologist for the NSA. If I was in congress as a republican, I'd be lucky to go even a month before getting kicked out of the caucus.