Discussion on Statehouse Live: Democrats say 'carve out' issue on developmentally disabled and KanCare won't go away / LJWorld.com

On Statehouse Live: Democrats say 'carve out' issue on developmentally disabled and KanCare won't go away

Delicious
Digg
Tumblr
Wordpress
Reddit
Copy and paste the link:

The carve out better pass by a large margin if it comes up for another vote because likely will be vetoed by Governor if wins on a close vote. Doubt it will be possible to get a 2/3 majority to overturn the veto.

misplacedcheesehead 1 year, 1 month ago

I absolutely have to go with the Dems on this one.

acornwebworks 1 year, 1 month ago

I don't understand why the Governor still can't grasp that services for people with developmental disabilities isn't a "health" care issue.

Of course, he also thinks that turning Medicaid over to for-profit businesses is going to be "cheaper" and "save money".

BigDog 1 year, 1 month ago

So since.most people ignored Scott Rothchild's article from yesterday .... it becomes a headline story online today?

Way to go LJ World .... maybe next headline can be something written by staff at another paper like Topeka from Sunday.

none2 1 year, 1 month ago

I have to say that I do not understand why development disabilities should be taken out, but not the others. As someone who had to deal with two different people in the nursing homes, their needs were NOT identical. Both had to be somewhat customized.

I just find it difficult to understand why we are dividing people with needs into two different groups. I would think it makes sense to either have everything stay as is, or all move to privatized. To do otherwise sounds biased. Can someone explain how it is not?

chootspa 1 year, 1 month ago

I'd rather we take them all out, but this isn't a biased request.

With DD, the necessary services are long term and chronic, and not all of them are medical. Someone with DD could need a high level of support for 70 years. Unlike other patients, they don't recover, and their condition isn't fatal.

none2 1 year, 1 month ago

What you say reminds me of dealing with the elderly. You cannot really turn back the clock, and for many they could be around for a considerable amount of time. Case in point, for some elderly, the biggest thing they need is physical therapy to "maintain" as long as possible their level of physical ability. Unfortunately, even with the current insurance rules, you only get physical therapy until progress is no longer seen. If instead they were more accommodating on that rule, we might keep people out of nursing homes longer than otherwise. While some may gripe about extended physical therapy, the fact is that nursing home care is more expensive. The longer seniors can stay in their home the more money the state saves. That is why it is hard for me to see developmentally disabled individuals as that different.

Of course the bottom line might get down to we simply don't have the money. (No I'm not talking about the foolish ideas that companies are going to rush to Kansas if we have a lower tax rate. If that were the case South Dakota would be a top notch state for business. The most famous business I think of off the top of my head from there was Gateway Computers, and they chose to move to San Diego, California which is a much higher taxed state.)

chootspa 1 year, 1 month ago

Kansas should do a better job keeping citizens in the community, whether it's from age or DD. I totally agree. In fact, they may be facing Olmstead action in the future for their inability to do so.

However, the prognosis and length of care is markedly different in the two populations. An elderly person wouldn't need job supports to remain in the community, for instance.

jafs 1 year, 1 month ago

There are certainly some similarities between the aging population and the dd one, but also some differences.

merrill 1 year, 1 month ago

Is Gov Sam Brownback a shareholder in the medical insurance industry?

Tax dollars would be spent on: Golden Parachutes exist Obscene CEO and BOD pay packages exist Shareholders exist the monster bureaucracy that over 2,000 insurance providers create exists * the cost of 6 lobbyists per elected official exists

corrupt political campaign spending against insurance reform exists such as: Former aides and elected officials spending $1.4 million a day fighting reform.

For example: A. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/health-care-reform/2009/07/health_care_continues_its_inte.html B. http://www.campaignmoney.org/HMO_insurance_spend_to_kill_reform C. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/05/AR2009070502770.html

Politicians as shareholders: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/12/AR2009061204075.html
Insurers Wrongfully Charging Consumers Billions http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/24/AR2009062401636.html ========================== Point of interest:

Healthcare Reform Report Card Let's Compare: Single-Payer (HR 676 and S 703) Expanded Medicare for All Vs. Proposed Healthcare “Private insurance with Public Option” http://www.healthcare-now.org/docs/spreport.pdf

mikekt 1 year, 1 month ago

Complaining about Big Government is just a "libertarian businessman's excuse model" to advocate for huge private insurance co. rip offs of the public, that benefit a few at the top of these companies & their share holders. With private health insurance companies, they take their 7% profit cut off of the gross amount of what you & others pay, to afford medical care. The only ways that they make more money than that is either to save $ by denying you medical service coverages ( Private Death Panels that deny payments...YA..... that you pay for! ),... or if the general costs of heath care charged by providers goes up, in which case they profit by their boats floating up with the increases of medical costs. If the cost of health care goes up 50% next year, their profits should rise by about 50%,... not that their share holders will be offended by that, or that top managers who get performance bonuses ( for whatever predictably happens anyway ) will suffer. With health care in the US as the most expensive in the world but the quality of care delivered ranking 25th or so, maybe we should wake up. I recently priced a 64 slice CT Scan for my heart. It's a test that looks for & rates calcium deposits in ones coronary arteries as a predictor of future heart problems from blocked arteries. It was only $64, just east, down K10 & 7 a ways. Why so cheep? Because neither medicare... and thusly, neither private insurance, would pay for this test, that i am able to get done in a Cardiologists Private Offices, on an expensive CT Scan machine with operator with a reading of my results, for $64. You won't get that kind of cost, on any other CT Scan done privately, that insurance or medicare, etc., would pay for! Trust me.... cause i'm not running for anything! I was told that the provider was in a price war with a hospital on the south end of I-435 that was charging $72 for the service.....HA,HA,HA! Price war (?) when insurance of any kind pays like a clock???? Don't believe the idea that somehow the insurance companies are going to cut you some great deal to save Kansas money. They just want to saddle Kansans with their executives & shareholders retirement packages.