Posted on 03/18/2015 2:08:48 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
A new poll shows that a majority of Wisconsinites want Gov. Scott Walker to expand Medicaid and to take action to prevent more than 184,000 people from losing health care subsidies, potentially making their health care unaffordable, if the U.S. Supreme Court eliminates subsidies in Wisconsin and 33 other states.
The court is expected to render its decision in June.
The survey of 1,071 registered voters, commissioned by Citizen Action of Wisconsin, showed that by a margin of by 31 percent — 58 to 27 percent — respondents thought Walker should accept a federally funded expansion of Medicaid, which Walker has rejected. And by a 20 percent margin — 53 to 33 percent — respondents felt that Walker should take action to prevent people from losing their health care if the U.S. Supreme Court rules that states that didn't set up their own Obamacare exchanges lose federal health care subsidies. The group put the margin of error at 3 percent.
The survey was conducted by Public Policy Polling, which frequently does polling for Democrats and liberal groups. While the poll asked respondents whether Walker should "take action to prevent Wisconsinites losing their health care coverage," it avoided the politically charged terms "Affordable Care Act" or "Obamacare" and didn't directly mention health care exchanges.
"It is clear that the Wisconsin public, by huge margins, supports major revisions to the state budget on health care issues,” said Robert Kraig, executive director of Citizen Action. “The public wants Wisconsin to take all the money that is on the table to strengthen BadgerCare (the state's Medicaid program), and believes it is Gov. Walker’s responsibility to take action to safeguard the health coverage of the over 183,000 Wisconsinites at risk from a potentially dangerous U.S. Supreme Court decision.”
Of those responding, 34 percent were Democrats, 32 percent Republicans, and 34 percent independent or "other."
The latest figures from the U.S. Department of Health and Human services show that 184,541 people who signed up for insurance on the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) insurance exchange qualify for subsidies. Those subsidies are at risk in the Supreme Court ruling, which will determine whether Wisconsin and other states that opted for a federally run exchange instead of a state-run system qualify for federal subsidies.
The lowest earners in the Wisconsin exchange are among some 72,000 people earning between 100 percent and 138 percent of the federal poverty level that Walker kicked off BadgerCare in 2013 when he rejected federal Medicaid expansion funds.
Donna Friedsam, director of health policy at the UW Population Health Institute, said that if the subsidies end, it’s likely that a lot of people who receive subsidies will simply go uninsured.
“I’m not going to say what will happen to them,” Friedsam said. “But I can say that it’s very likely they won’t be able to afford insurance if they purchased it though the Affordable Care Act.”
A recent U.S. Department of Health and Human Services report puts the average health exchange premium in Wisconsin at $450, $319 of which is paid for with subsidies. That leaves consumers with an average monthly bill of $131.
The subsidies are available to people making up to four times the federal poverty level, or about $97,000 for a family of four.
“The subsidy decreases the premiums for people in Wisconsin by about 70 percent on average,” said Friedsam. “So people will face really substantial, triple or quadruple, the amount of what they’re currently paying.”
Wisconsin is one of 34 states that have not set up their own exchanges, using the federal healthcare.gov website instead. Some Republican governors, like Ohio's John Kasich, haven't counted out starting their own exchanges if the Supreme Court strikes down their state's subsidies.
But Walker has. His office confirmed last week that if a Supreme Court decision ends Obamacare subsidies in Wisconsin, the state will not set up its own exchange.
"While we continue to monitor the federal court case and the pending outcome later this year, ultimately, the responsibility rests with the federal government to fix this federal law," Walker spokeswoman Laurel Patrick told the National Journal.
As Walker emerges as a potential GOP frontrunner for the presidential nomination, some in the national press have pointed to his decision to remove low-earners from BadgerCare as a political liability.
"Of the Republican presidential contenders, no one has more at stake than Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker,” writes Bloomberg’s Joshua Green last week.
“If the court strikes down the subsidies and Congress doesn’t bail him out, Walker will find himself in an especially difficult position," Green writes. "He’ll have to come up with a way to help the roughly 185,000 Wisconsinites who will lose their subsidies. And in addition, he’ll be personally culpable for the 83,000 low-income transitioners who would not have been affected by a court decision had he left them on Medicaid, but would now lose their subsidies and probably their health insurance."
Friedsam put the number at closer to 72,000 (the 83,000 figure is based on an earlier estimate).
Citing the poll numbers Tuesday, state Sen. Jon Erpenbach, D-Middleton, accused Walker of putting his presidential aspirations ahead of his responsibility to the state’s most needy residents.
"Gov. Walker is running for president, and he’s trying to be the most conservative of conservatives out there," Erpenbach said. "And as a result of that some 80,000 people in Wisconsin are being thrown under his presidential bus just so he can look really tough."
Erpenbach said Walker's decision makes it "pretty clear" that his priority is "basically to try to make the Affordable Care Act fail."
In case you’re interested in learning about Scott Walker, here are 3 places to look.
http://religiondispatches.org/evangelicals-looking-for-walker-to-do-nothing-in-2016-election/
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2015_03/scott_walker_w_without_the_com054605.php
And I've been on a thread where Cruz was lied about and attacked over things he never said or did.
So, what is your point?
Are we looking to support the Most CONSERVATIVE candidate or not?
I know that I am, me myself and I, with my vote.
Good. Go for it.
Nothing like a little bias in the article. I’ve long felt that merging all healthcare into one system such as Obamacare is wrong. To me, it would have been far cheaper to have private and public systems operating simultaneously. For the private system, tort reform and competition across state lines would be required. For the public system, enrollment for those not covered by private systems would be mandatory, augmented by a general sales tax to assist those lacking the means. Many city and counties have long run health clinics, thus ensuring that treatment is not denied. Put these clinics on a state basis and I suspect all citizens would receive reasonable care as opposed to the current rationale that all citizens are “entitled” to equal care, regardless of what premium is paid.
Our current system is robbing Peter to pay Paul’s premium. By increasing rates for everyone, the elderly in particular are being forced to support the young. My wife, involuntarily retired and not eligible for Medicare, was forced into a compliant healthcare plan that has cost us over $15,000 for the past two years (additional premiums plus higher deductibles). The good news is that she is covered for birth control despite having her tubes tied over 30 years ago and now being well above normal child bearing age. Because of the higher premiums, she will now have to draw her Social Security retirement early, thereby penalizing her income for the remainder of her life. Given the poor jobs being created by the economy, I foresee even higher rates on anyone having assets. In order to implement socialism, Obama has divided us by age, race, and income. I pray daily that Americans will wake up and oppose the power grabbing crooks in government.
I have to say, for someone who's been around as long as you VRWC, I'm surprised to see you use the same tactics that liberals use--shouting down your opponents with name-calling, while providing no substantial argument otherwise.
It's shameful.
It's a shame to hear him tap-dance around whether or not marijuana policy should be left to the states.
Makes sense. Walker-bots. Thanks for the insight!
No. Thou shalt not steal. Taking money from productive people to subsidize parasites is stealing. To steal for people who do not even want to have Obamacare is both stupid and evil.
Works for me. Never should have become law in the first place, so no way in Hades we should do anything to "fix" it. Here's hoping Walker continues to answer his critics in a straightforward, businesslike manner.
bttt!
Another PATHETIC Walkerbot. Taking flak, over the target. Read FR’s mission statement numbskull.
Shaddup, worthless Walkerbot. I ain’t here to be liked nor convince you of anything.
Gov. Scott Walker's Immigration Plan [3:49 YouTube]
Gov. Scott Walker on Iran, Russia and Keystone XL [5:57 YouTube]
Gov. Scott Walker on Legalizing Marijuana and Same Sex Marriage [2:53 YouTube]
Gov. Scott Walker on Winning the Millennial Vote [2:22 YouTube]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.