Medicaid: An aid for Low Bread-Winner, Everyone or Service Providers?

Medicaid: An aid for Low Bread-Winner, Everyone or Service Providers?

The US is under a great hustle bustle on Medicaid program. Under the leadership of Barack Obama, in 2010 affordable care act was also upheld by the US Supreme Court. This act was also known as Obamacare which was the expansion of Medicaid eligibility. It was the time when the Supreme Court directed this as an unconstitutional force on them. On the one hand, the whole nation stands seeking beneficiary; the aid was supposed to benefit the poorest of the country. The expansion was for the people with annual incomes below 138% of the federal poverty level. For instance, the amount varied from $26,347 for a family of three members to $15,417 for an individual. Many questions since then remained unanswered or unknown about the law, particularly as it relates to Medicaid expansion which made every citizen conscious about becoming the beneficiary.

The best part about the policy is that it does not only focuses on health care. Apart from health aid, it helps an individual to deal with the financial crisis too. According to statistics conducted by the state of Oregon, after one year of enrollment in Medicaid, low-income childless adults significantly reduced their financial strain, increased their health care use, and reported having overall better health. This expansion helped in overcoming improper healthcare and decreased mortality rates, mentioned by the New England Journal of Medicine.

Though there are some misconception and cliché, the Medicaid is jointly funded by the state and federal government. Through this fund low-income families, poor pregnant women, certain senior citizens, and some disabled individuals are benefitted. But the Supreme court upheld the ACA in 2012. And since it was an optional aid which resulted in the withdrawal of it. It is the decision of governors and state legislatures whether to implement this policy or not. If a state opts not to expand the program, the federal government cannot take away the Medicaid funds a state already receives.

The U.S. government would pay for the vast preponderance of the Medicaid expansion. States do not bear any percentage of the cost for the development until 2017. The federal government will gradually transition to cover 90% cost through the year 2020. Before accounting for state and federal government rise in revenues and savings, the independent Congressional Budget Office predicts that states will raise their Medicaid spending by only 2.8 percent while providing health coverage to 17 million and more low-income children and adults between 2014 and 2022.

Healthcare is the basic need of an individual which should be taken care of by the state. This policy is solely responsible for poor health care maintenance. If this would be taken care well, then as per an Arkansas model the lowest income gainer will also enjoy the private insurance. Apart from the benefits, the opponents are coming up with the new argument that, if everybody would be included in the beneficiary policy, then how come millions of demands be fulfilled? The US is lacking the supply of doctors and health care professionals to balance the increasing need for Medicaid. Also, to counter the demand and supply analysis health policy institute of Ohio said, by 2015 Medicaid expansion will create 23000 jobs. It will not only increase the market but expand the market as well. By 2015 new jobs will hit the state. So that the two ends could meet well for the overall welfare of the nation.

The opponents have claimed as why Medicaid is supported with above reasons. Proponents also come up with their arguments claiming that if the policy will be decreased or not supported well, then almost 50 million Americans whose coverage comes entirely from Medicaid would consolidate the ranks of the more than 40 million people in this country who are currently uninsured. Be it pregnant women or disabled individual the state must think of the building of the nation. This does not only ensure the overall development of the country but sounds like a significant role to play.

Increase or not? What’s your opinion? Should the federal government increase funding of health care for low-income individuals (Medicaid)?

No Comments

Post A Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Log in

Forgot password?

Don't have an account? Register

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy