Submitted by Elaine Magliaro, Weekend Contributor
Last week, I wrote a post about Josh Miller (Not All Needy People Are As Deserving As Others), a young Republican state legislator from Heber Springs, Arkansas. Miller, who was paralyzed more than a decade ago in a catastrophic car accident, has been able to live a productive life due to the medical benefits he has received from both Medicare and Medicaid. Yet, this young state senator has spoken out against Medicaid expansion in Arkansas. Some of us find his stance on this issue to be hypocritical.
This past Tuesday, lawmakers in Arkansas voted to continue allowing the state “to use Medicaid dollars to buy private health-care insurance for poorer residents, overcoming resistance from some Republicans who said the program amounted to an endorsement of the Affordable Care Act.” According to the Wall Street Journal, Arkansas became the first state “to offer a ‘private option’ to extend coverage to lower-income residents…” Supporters of the program saw the private option “as a way to accept federal dollars and cut the number of uninsured residents without enlarging Medicaid.”
Matt Campbell of Blue Hog Report said that when he heard about the legislature’s vote to fund the private option for another fiscal year he “halfheartedly hoped that the extra ‘yes’ vote might have been Rep. Josh Miller.” Such was not the case however. What Campbell said he finds most hypocritical and troubling about Miller’s “no” vote on the private option is that the young lawmaker actually used his position as a legislator “to make blatantly self-serving changes to the Medicaid law” which would make it easier for him to get the same coverage that he “would deny to others.” Campbell says that Miller was a main sponsor in 2013 of Act 1048. That Act changes how Arkansas law defines a person’s eligibility for receiving Medicaid.
Eligibility prior to ACT 1048:
an individual who meets the disability assets and unearned income standards to receive supplemental security income, who would be considered to be receiving supplemental security income benefits but for his or her earned income, and whose net combined family income is less than two hundred fifty percent (250%) of the federal poverty guideline. Miller’s bill eligibility change:
How Miller’s bill would change eligibility:
an individual who meets the disability assets and unearned income standards to receive supplemental security income, who would be considered to be receiving supplemental security income benefits but for his or her earned income, and whose net combined family income is less than two hundred fifty percent (250%) of the federal poverty guideline.
Campbell claimed that “while lawmakers and policy wonks were arguing over the propriety of expanding Medicaid in general to include non-disabled adults making up to 138% of the federal poverty line, Rep. Miller was working to ensure that, no matter how much money he might make, he could never lose his sweet, sweet government-funded insurance.” Campbell said that Miller didn’t stop at that, though. He said that Act 1048 also changes “Arkansas Code Annotated 20-77-1204 regarding the administration of Medicaid for ‘Low-Income Disabled Working Persons.’” He said Miller’s bill also added 1204(c), which states:
A rule adopted under this section shall not include a test for income, assets, or resources.
Campbell added that while 1204(b)(2) “explicitly requires DHS to adopt rules that establish ‘premium and cost-sharing charges on a sliding scale based on income’… thanks to Rep. Miller, DHS cannot actually include any kind of means testing in those rules…”
It certainly does appear that Josh Miller thinks that not all needy people in Arkansas are as deserving of Medicaid benefits as is he. It appears that he truly is a hypocrite too.
~ Submitted by Elaine Magliaro
The views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not those of the blog, the host, or other weekend bloggers. As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays or art are solely their decision and responsibility.
SOURCES
The Disgustingly Self-Serving Hypocrisy of Rep. Josh Miller (Blue Hog Report)
Arkansas Lawmakers Pass ‘Private Option’ Health-Care Law: Program Allows State to Use Medicaid Dollars to Buy Private Health-care Insurance for Some (Wall Street Journal)
Not All Needy People Are As Deserving As Others: Paralyzed Arkansas Lawmaker Who Receives Medicaid Benefits Opposes Medicaid Expansion in His State (Res Ipsa Loquitor)
In my view, Sean Hannity is popular because he is the voice of those who are most comfortable in a world without nuance, where every issue is analyzed in stark, black and white terms requiring little thought. He hearkens back to the old “my country right or wrong” days. He is not a journalist, and does not pretend to be a journalist. He is instead a talk-radio rabble rouser with a TV camera. He is belligerent, narrow-minded, rude and uneducated, but always prepared to reinforce the parochial suspicions of the uninformed. He reassures the frightened that their fears are well-founded and that his followers are all that stand between freedom and atheistic socialism. I guess you could say I don’t care much for the guy.
Best description of Hannity I’ve read.
My comment was directed to Justin, just to be clear.
Hate mongers? Sheesh. Should people who think MSNBC is too biased toward liberals be considered hate mongers too? If it’s an honest disagreement, then why inject the hate mongering charge in the conversation? Sounds a bit extreme.
AY,
You’re getting me confused. Maybe you haven’t read through all the comments on this post. It was a Fox News follower and Sean Hannity admirer who called those of us who disagreed with him on this thread “hate-mongers.”
I have no objection to your commenting on my posts. I will say I was puzzled by your earlier comment. Let me add that the thought that you might be a racist never entered my mind.
ElaineM,
Well, you might be right…. But anyone that can claim Fox News is fair and balanced is as delusional as the followers of Limbaugh…. If you’d rather me not comment on your posts, I’ll respect that as well….
AY,
Thanks for the clarification. That said, I think there was no point to your injecting that comment into this discussion.
Elaine,
I don’t think you’re either a hate monger or a racist based upon what you’ve posted…. I am sorry I was not clear…. I have been called a racist for disagreeing with Obama….. Not you….
AY,
Ha…ha! Really funny! I don’t appreciate being called a hate-monger. I also don’t appreciate your implying that I have called anyone a racist who has disagreed with Obama. I disagree with many of the things Obama has done.
Elaine,
I suppose it’s better than being call a racist…. For disagreeing with Obama…..
Accusing people who disagree with you of being “hate-mongers.” That’s a constructive approach for engaging in a spirited discussion!
Thanks Nick. I’m humbled by your compliment. These hate-mongers don’t understand that we have an honest disagreement. It’s not about being right or wrong. It’s all about engaging in constructive, spirited discussion. The free exchange of ideas.
Hypocrite…..
Justin, Churchill said, “I like a man who grins when he fights.” You remind me of that quote. You have the attitude this place desperately needs.
Justin,
This is the realistic channel.
Fox News, Fairly Unbalanced. Justin, just teasin’.
Excuse me, is this the hate channel?
Fox News: Fair & Balanced
There once was a free thinking man
Who yells Basta! as loud as he can
Prosciutto all eaten, all that’s left is Spam.
Canned knowledge, fast as you can, coming right up Ma’am!
With affection from Annie. 🙂
Elaine,
When you put it that way, you are probably correct!
rafflaw,
I’d say some of Sean Hannity’s “news” is quite original too.
😉