Able bodied and want medicaid? Get a job

Rate this topic

72 posts in this topic

Working is better for your health.  Studies have proven it.  The left should see that as a  positive, right?.  Like a sugar tax, almost.  Sometimes the government needs to force people to do the right thing.  This only impacts those non disabled of working age on medicad



The Trump administration cleared the way Thursday for states to impose work requirements on many Americans who depend on Medicaid, the mammoth government health insurance program for the poor.

The much-anticipated move would mark the first time in the program’s half-century history that the government will require people to work in exchange for health coverage. In states that decide to impose the new requirement, it is widely expected to shrink Medicaid rolls.


The new plan sets the stage for a potentially long and contentious legal battle over the shape and purpose of a health program that more than 70 million Americans now depend on.

The administration is outlining the work-requirement plan in a letter to state officials. The letter indicates the administration’s willingness to grant state requests to impose requirements on working-age, non-disabled Medicaid beneficiaries.


“Medicaid needs to be more flexible so that states can best address the needs of this population,” said Seema Verma, who oversees the Medicare and Medicaid programs at the Department of Health and Human Services and has long called for putting new requirements on Medicaid patients, including charging them more for their care.

Many patient advocates note that a small fraction of the people covered by Medicaid are of working age, non-disabled and currently unemployed. The main impact of the rules will be to subject poor people to stacks of paperwork that will drive some to drop coverage, the critics say.

The administration is nonetheless expected to quickly approve requests from as many as 10 states, all but one of which has a Republican governor.

The states are: Arizona, Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Utah and Wisconsin.

Many other states, such as California, are not expected to impose work requirements.

Verma and other conservatives argue that forcing working-age Medicaid beneficiaries to work or seek work — a strategy used for years in other federally funded aid programs for the poor — will improve their health.

“States … want more flexibility to engage their working-age, able-bodied citizens on Medicaid,” Verma told a gathering of state Medicaid directors in November. “They want to develop programs that will help them break the chains of poverty and live up to their fullest potential. We support this.”

Critics of the Trump administration’s approach note that a growing body of evidence shows that Medicaid health coverage is helping many Americans improve their health and their finances, not holding them back, as Verma and other have suggested.

A large majority of Medicaid recipients — almost two-thirds — are children, elderly or disabled. They will be exempt from the new requirements.

At the same time, there is little evidence that many working-age Medicaid enrollees are choosing the government coverage instead of seeking work.

According to a recent analysis by the nonprofit Kaiser Family Foundation, 6 in 10 of the nearly 25 million working-age, non-disabled adults on Medicaid are already working full-time or part-time.

Of the remaining 10 million unemployed Medicaid enrollees, more than a third had an illness that prevented them from working, about another third were taking care of a family member, 15% were in school, 9% were retired, and 6% said they couldn’t find work.

Trump administration officials said Wednesday they would ensure that Medicaid enrollees in states with a work requirement would still get covered if they are involved in a “community engagement” activity, such as taking care of a family member, seeking work or job training.

Also protected would be Medicaid enrollees who are too ill to work, especially because of a drug addiction.

But those rules are certain to create significant administrative burdens. Medicaid enrollees will probably have to go through a new process of demonstrating that they are meeting the work or “community engagement” standards. Some won’t meet the requirements in time and will lose coverage, advocates predict.

“We know the upshot is people are going to be cut off,” said Jane Perkins, legal director of the National Health Law Center, a patient advocacy organization that is preparing to challenge the work requirements in court.

“We are going to sweep in people who are working or trying to get work because they haven’t filled out the necessary paperwork,” Perkins said. “And cutting off people from Medicaid is certainly not going to improve their health.”



Edited by jkrock

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 mins ago, HugeDinghy said:

mark my words, we are heading to a subsidized employment model for adults similar to the federally funded one for "youth" (which goes up to 24).


Universal/Basic income is already a huge talking point among many. :banghd:



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

works many different ways. easy example-  think summer youth employment. state puts out RFP for contracted vendors who are to provide youth with X weeks of summer employment at $X/hr. they take the youth on their payroll, develop the "jobs" and then place and monitor the youth. usually some sort of work readiness training on the front end. 85% of the budget is wages, the other 15% for whatever.


I see work requirements becoming more popular, but because of peoples skills not matching the jobs, and people whining about making people work :freak: they will allow volunteering to count, and over time grow the budget to provide these "volunteer" opportunities to be paid a minimum wage rate, and then higher, over time (probably start as a stipend not tied to an hourly rate so its easier for folks to digest, and then grow to an hourly rate over time)...it'll be sold as a way to help support non profits (para professionals/tutors etc), schools 9tutors, afterschool program staff etc)  and munipalities (libraries, park and rec etc).  

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, jkrock said:

Good.  i hope all the deadbeats move to California and vote D

Meh, this rule change doesn't really have any teeth. It exempts 90-97% of those on Medicaid. 

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys know that over 65% of families on Medicaid have at least 1 full time worker in the house right, ? about 14% have a part time worker.

This is for non elderly house holds .

And of course the states with lowest percent are states like Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, West Virginia and surprisingly Wisconsin and Ohio


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

My guess is states that implement this will suffer a net loss. By the time they hire and train people and outfit them to manage this system, it will cost more than any savings from the requirement. 

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, the only reason a person should get social security, Medicaid, or any other form of assistance would be if they have suffered some form of truly debilitating injury that leaves them either so severely mentally handicapped that they can't think, they are quadriplegic, or they are missing all arms and legs.



There are to many social security mooching pieces of crap crying about back injuries, among other things; they need to get a job and quit sucking off the government. 


You hurt your back and herniate a couple discs? Go through a couple back surgeries? Get a damn job, typing doesn't require lifting. 



Edited by Beastly Backlash

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.