Jonathan Sperber: "Karl Marx: A Nineteenth-Century Life": Tuesday Excellent Book Noting Weblogging
DJW: Gottlieb helps, but NYT still nowhere near the most embarrassing op-ed page in a national paper: Noted

John Roberts Is the Gift That Keeps on Giving, Doesn't He?: The View from the Roasterie XXXI: November 12, 2013

The way that ObamaCare was supposed to work, as more people became beneficiaries of expanded Medicaid, the current money flows that pay for safety-net hospitals to treat the uninsured would go away--for Medicaid would now be paying. Thus when John Roberts rewrote the Affordable Care Act from the bench to give states the option not just to accept or reject Medicaid as a whole, but to (a) accept Medicaid, (b) reject Medicaid, or (c) simply keep "Old Medicaid", he should also have rewritten the parts of the law that phased-out the payments to safety-net hospitals, shouldn't he? Me? I think a judge who is too lazy to familiarize himself with the case he is deciding and the likely consequences of his actions should resign. What do you think?

Sabrina Tavernise: Cuts in Hospital Subsidies Threaten Safety-Net Care:

The uninsured pour into Memorial Health hospital here: the waitress with cancer in her voice box who for two years assumed she just had a sore throat. The unemployed diabetic with a wound stretching the length of her shin. The construction worker who could no longer breathe on his own after weeks of untreated asthma attacks and had to be put on a respirator.... Many of these patients were expected to gain health coverage... through a major expansion of Medicaid.... But after the Supreme Court in 2012 gave states the right to opt out, Georgia... Republican-led, refused to broaden the program. Now... a government subsidy, little known outside health policy circles but critical to the [safety-net care] hospitals’ survival, is being sharply reduced under the new health law..."

More from the article:

SAVANNAH, Ga. — The uninsured pour into Memorial Health hospital here: the waitress with cancer in her voice box who for two years assumed she just had a sore throat. The unemployed diabetic with a wound stretching the length of her shin. The construction worker who could no longer breathe on his own after weeks of untreated asthma attacks and had to be put on a respirator.

Dr. Guy Petruzzelli at Memorial Health hospital in Savannah, Ga. Memorial provides care for many patients who fail what Dr. Petruzzelli calls “the wallet biopsy.” >Many of these patients were expected to gain health coverage under the Affordable Care Act through a major expansion of Medicaid, the medical insurance program for the poor. But after the Supreme Court in 2012 gave states the right to opt out, Georgia, like about half the states, almost all of them Republican-led, refused to broaden the program.

Now, in a perverse twist, many of the poor people who rely on safety-net hospitals like Memorial will be doubly unlucky. A government subsidy, little known outside health policy circles but critical to the hospitals’ survival, is being sharply reduced under the new health law.

The subsidy, which for years has helped defray the cost of uncompensated and undercompensated care, was cut substantially on the assumption that the hospitals would replace much of the lost income with payments for patients newly covered by Medicaid or private insurance. But now the hospitals in states like Georgia will get neither the new Medicaid patients nor most of the old subsidies, which many say are crucial to the mission of care for the poor...

Comments