The States and Medicaid
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 18, 2024, 03:27:48 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  Constitution and Law (Moderator: World politics is up Schmitt creek)
  The States and Medicaid
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: The States and Medicaid  (Read 1488 times)
Del Tachi
Republican95
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,820
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: 1.46

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: June 12, 2012, 11:09:35 PM »

What recourse would the federal government have if a State's legislature passed a measure blocking State funds from going towards Medicaid, a fed-state partnership?

Are the Feds going to send in the national guard to occupy the State capitol and force the state legislature to vote otherwise?  LOL

Or could a federal court demand that the state pay its Medicaid dues?  What would the court use to enforce this ruling?
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: June 13, 2012, 09:04:12 AM »
« Edited: June 13, 2012, 09:10:22 AM by True Federalist »

State participation in Medicaid is voluntary.  All that would happen if a State refused to pay its share is the Feds wouldn't pay their share either and Medicaid would cease to operate in that State.  Of course, the economic impact of such a decision is such that it is highly unlikely a State would ever choose to not participate, leaving in question whether their participation truly is voluntary.
Logged
muon2
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,798


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: June 13, 2012, 09:37:39 AM »

Not only is it voluntary, but it is run by federal reimbursement. Until a state incurs Medicaid costs, the feds don't pay. After service is provided and the state pays, the feds reimburse the state for their share.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,069
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: June 13, 2012, 12:43:36 PM »

Yes it is a moot point, because the states are chained by golden handcuffs.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: June 28, 2012, 09:29:35 AM »

Yes it is a moot point, because the states are chained by golden handcuffs.

Looks like the handcuffs have been loosened by the Obamacare case.
Logged
muon2
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,798


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: June 28, 2012, 09:44:37 AM »

Yes it is a moot point, because the states are chained by golden handcuffs.

Looks like the handcuffs have been loosened by the Obamacare case.

And ironically the expansion of health care to those who can't afford it may have been scuttled, while those who can afford it must get insurance. It seems exactly backwards from the original goals of the act.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,069
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: June 28, 2012, 10:13:34 AM »

Yes it is a moot point, because the states are chained by golden handcuffs.

Looks like the handcuffs have been loosened by the Obamacare case.

And ironically the expansion of health care to those who can't afford it may have been scuttled, while those who can afford it must get insurance. It seems exactly backwards from the original goals of the act.

This aspect of the SCOTUS decision just blows my mind away. What the feds giveth, the feds cannot taketh away, if the state recipients don't dance to its tune.  We have another fertile area for future litigation it seems, since such a standard is perforce fuzzy in its application.
Logged
muon2
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,798


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: June 28, 2012, 10:17:35 AM »
« Edited: June 28, 2012, 10:22:12 AM by muon2 »

Yes it is a moot point, because the states are chained by golden handcuffs.

Looks like the handcuffs have been loosened by the Obamacare case.

And ironically the expansion of health care to those who can't afford it may have been scuttled, while those who can afford it must get insurance. It seems exactly backwards from the original goals of the act.

This aspect of the SCOTUS decision just blows my mind away. What the feds giveth, the feds cannot taketh away, if the state recipients don't dance to its tune.  We have another fertile area for future litigation it seems, since such a standard is perforce fuzzy in its application.

And this vote to strike the Medicaid portion was 7-2 (Ginsburg and Sotomayor dissent). The states were clearly big winners here.
Logged
7,052,770
Harry
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 35,382
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: June 28, 2012, 05:58:37 PM »

What recourse would the federal government have if a State's legislature passed a measure blocking State funds from going towards Medicaid, a fed-state partnership?

Are the Feds going to send in the national guard to occupy the State capitol and force the state legislature to vote otherwise?  LOL

Or could a federal court demand that the state pay its Medicaid dues?  What would the court use to enforce this ruling?

If our legislature has the gall to refuse expanding coverage to the state that needs it most, yes, it should be forced to do so at gunpoint.
Logged
Frodo
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,541
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: June 28, 2012, 11:33:20 PM »

What recourse would the federal government have if a State's legislature passed a measure blocking State funds from going towards Medicaid, a fed-state partnership?

Are the Feds going to send in the national guard to occupy the State capitol and force the state legislature to vote otherwise?  LOL

Or could a federal court demand that the state pay its Medicaid dues?  What would the court use to enforce this ruling?

This scenario can be pre-empted if the federal government simply federalized/nationalized the whole program. 
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.037 seconds with 12 queries.