If you’re wondering why the Democrats selected former Kentucky governor Steve Beshear to deliver their response to Donald Trump’s speech in front of joint session of Congress on Tuesday, look no further than the Bluegrass State’s experience with Obamacare. According to Bloomberg, “at the beginning of 2016, almost one in three Kentuckians had Medicaid or insurance through a federally subsidized Affordable Care Act plan.”
More impressively:
Within two years [of enactment of the Affordable Care Act], the state’s uninsured rate had fallen to 6 percent of the population from 20 percent. More than 420,000 people had been insured through Medicaid expansion, dropping the number of uninsured in some low-income jobs — at restaurants, construction sites, gas stations and discount stores, among others — by between 35 percent and 52 percent, according to data from the Kentucky Center for Economic Policy, which studies impacts on the poor.
If you listen to the current governor of Kentucky, however, you will learn that none of these people were actually able to access health care.
…Gov. Matt Bevin, a Republican from Kentucky, argued that coverage numbers aren’t a good metric to measure health plans by.
“What do we want out of the health care system? We want healthier outcomes,” he told reporters. “That should be the ultimate goal. Simply enrolling people serves absolutely no value if all we’ve given them is a plastic card that says you’re now covered. They take that to a doctor who won’t see them.”
Not that it will help Gov. Bevin’s case, but he was referring to a different set of metrics. He was looking at the results of a study that McKinsey & Company put together for the National Governors Association. It looks at what will happen if a House Republican plan to “repeal and replace” Obamacare is passed and signed by President Trump.
The analysis includes graphs on what the Republican plan to overhaul Obamacare’s tax credits, generally making them less generous, would do. They are based on the recent 19-page proposal that Republican leadership released about their plan to repeal and replace Obamacare. In particular, they look at the effect of switching from income-based tax credits (which give poor people more help) to age-based tax credits, where everyone would get the same amount.
The report estimates what would happen in a hypothetical state with 300,000 people in the individual market that has also expanded Medicaid. In the individual market, enrollment would fall 30 percent and 90,000 people would become uninsured.
An additional 115,000 people in that hypothetical state may also lose coverage because they are enrolled in Medicaid and cannot find an affordable private plan.
Depending on how you look at it, things would look even grimmer in states that did not expand Medicaid. Do you worry that over 50% of Obamacare enrollees in your non-expansion state would lose their insurance and be left with no affordable access to health care, or are you happy that your federal funding would only fall by 6% instead of by the 24% experienced in the states that did expand Medicaid.
The answer to that question will help determine just how much of a heartless ideologue you really are.
Now, Gov. Matt Bevin campaigned on repealing Obamacare but he didn’t quite manage to do it. He made it look like he was doing it by closing new enrollment in the popular individual Kynect market. But that just forces folks to use the federal webpage and stop pretending that Kynect wasn’t Obamacare by a different name.
As for Medicaid, well…
Instead of scrapping Kentucky’s expanded Medicaid, Bevin applied for the same kind of federal waiver won by other Republican governors, led by Pence. The waiver programs include Republican-looking add-ons — premiums, punishments, so-called skin in the game for the poor — that allowed the governors to expand Medicaid under Obamacare, while saying they were doing something else.
Bevin had to make his peace with Obamacare but that doesn’t mean he isn’t rooting for the Republicans in Congress to screw his constituents in the same uncomfortable places he was too squeamish to screw them himself. So, when presented with a study showing just how badly his people will get reamed by the House Republicans’ plan, he tells us that all they’ll be losing is a worthless plastic card that wouldn’t even allow them to see a doctor.
That’s his spin.
And he hopes he can get away with it because of another statistic:
Kentucky pushed Obamacare as anything but Obamacare in order to sidestep political hostility to the president, whose position on coal made him unpopular in a state with roughly half the coal jobs it had in 2010. Enrollees signed up for Kynect, the state’s brand of the health-law insurance, not Obamacare.
If Kentuckians want to hold a coal grudge, they’ll get more of the governance provided by Bevin and less of the tangible improvements in their lives provided by Gov. Beshear. Maybe they’ll figure this out when Beshear responds to Trump on Tuesday.
Even if they never get it, the Democrats are hoping that the rest of the country can figure it out.
The power of hate and resentment to be self-destructive in the extreme has been a deep and powerful thread in our nation’s history and is an ongoing force. I hope Beshear makes those connections forcefully and blow up the idea that Trump and the GOP are all out to help the WWC. They won’t ever help those people.
As a wise person once said on this site….
“They voted for him because he hates the same people I hate”
.
Always ever thus for the Republican of “40% of the vote no matter what”:
“”He’s pissing off enough people that I’m happy,” said Martin Yannario, 76, a Republican who spent his career at IBM. “I didn’t care for Romney because he was so weak-kneed. Trump is gutsy. … I don’t know if he’ll get anything done, but at least he’s stirring it up. Everyone in Washington is just afraid of their gravy train getting cut off, which is why they oppose him.””
WaPo — Feb 23rd on Tom Rice district special election
This is a sign of a party that doesn’t want to win.
Bernie should have been chosen to give the response, clearly.
Dasis S. Massimo, You win.
?
My bad.
LOL CPAC trying to undermine Sanders with the “Yoots”:
“Guess who is using Uber?” Dolin said. “[Millennials] like the freedom and the ability to pick up the phone and order food from any of the 20 restaurants in town. But you cannot have Uber and a socialist-run health care system — it’s both or neither.”
Er, whut????
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/24/14716104/socialism-bernie-sanders-cpac
The sharing economy has a much lower wage and therefore tax base than a more traditional economy. Single payer or single provider depend on a decent sized tax base to be able to offer benefits across the economic spectrum.
This is one area younger progressive can be quite hypocritical about. They Uber their way to protests about the $15 minimum wage and affordable healthcare for all. If they really care about those issues they wouldn’t be using services that help to depress wages.
Rather chicken/egg dilemma, no? If your pay is chicken feed…
Or telling them to stop using Amazon. Or stop shopping at Wal Mart. Damn hypocritical millennials.
Well that’s bullshit isn’t it?
I find it really odd that this needed to be spelled out to so many people who follow politics. I mean I still appreciate you writing it so consicely and clear for people who do not. Whether bad faith or just a really weird understanding of how politics work — especially when you’re trying to keep heads above water in rural areas — it’s just baffling either way.
It’s only baffling if you assume they actually want democratic majorities. In other words…if you assume they are democrats.
.
I guess. I mean Beshar failed to convince Kentucky, so maybe he’s just poor at making the case?
He didn’t hate the right people, nor hate them hard enough.
Just spit-balling here, but election in KY — most places, really — are probably not dispassionate tottings-up of conflicting policy positions.
exactly?
(As someone else notes downthread,) he was elected Governor in two consecutive statewide races (term-limited from third). He enacted Obamacare. It provided immense benefits to the people of KY, and is immensely popular as a result (even though an appalling number of addled KYians have to have it called “KYnect” to admit they like and support it).
What did Beshear fail to convince them of?
The need to smash the prevailing late-capitalist mode of production.
Simple, really
Can you just shut the fuck up? He didn’t even try to convince them of that sadly.
Strange that.
Usually I just over look but every once in a while the constant trolling gets to me.
I’ll be honest here…when you vote third party because you thought someone was mean on the internet you probably shouldn’t tell people to STFU.
.
Hoping to have a mobile app developed to do precisely that in time for Season 10 of Shark Tank.
As you pointed out, he enacted a program that proved popular and then saw his successor lose to someone who ran on destroying it. Is he the best person to make that case nationally since he failed to do so in his state?
Good to know that he ran his successor’s campaign. For a moment there, I was under the impression that a departing governor’s successor actually did stuff like, well, campaign. Thanks for clearing that up for us.
RE: ” . . . he failed to do so in his state”
As already noted.
His rightwingnut successor kept Obamacare with some relatively minor (but “punish-the-lazy-poor/skin-in-the-game”-style) tweaks (very similar to what my purple-leaning-red state’s GOP assholes insisted on to finally pass Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion), regardless whether or not he “ran on destroying it.” (Pretty sure booman covered that in his top-post?)
What the next governor actually did doesn’t really matter. Bevin ran on an anti-Obamacare platform. The point here is whether the pro-Obamacare message will be politically effective.
An anti-ACA campaign was much easier to run when the stakes were low for the voters. Now that folks realize that they have something tangible to lose, public opinion polls show a shift in favor of the ACA. And that is translating into some very angry town halls (to the extent that GOP Senators and Reps will face their constituents), and so on.
Could running on a pro-ACA platform be difficult at best prior to now? We might agree. It was certainly difficult in my state, and my party is now a minority party. Is running on a pro-ACA platform difficult now or will it be in the future? I’m not so sure. I’m willing to wager that the pro-ACA messengers are going to get a more friendly reception than previously. Keep in mind that the ACA has become status quo for us. The opponents now are arguing for a radical change that they themselves cannot quite define or agree upon. Status quo frames = more favorable attitudes and in this case potentially more votes come election time.
I essentially agree with all of this, but most of the movement in the polls is not among republicans. This may have more benefits in statewide elections than at a district level for the House or state legislatures.
That’s probably true enough, and might mitigate potential damage in Senate contests next year and be beneficial in various statewide offices such as Governor that come up in that particular electoral cycle (or even this year’s off-year election cycle).
One thing to watch for is continued movement among independents. Now again, this may vary from state to state, but independents often tend to be Republican-leaning. If that group is starting to favor ACA, could spell some real trouble for the GOP going forward.
I think you’re missing the point. There is absolutely no one else that can do that? No current politician? Also, too, what else is Cheeto going to mention in his speech? Is Beshear going to mention anything else?
Somebody’s missing the point all right.
I’m not missing the point. Beshear was elected with 60+% of the vote, he won twice, and reduced the number of uninsured people at the highest rate in the country because he tried to make the program work. And the constituents don’t want to give that up, even if Bevin was elected. Many of these people like the benefits, but think Republican talk of eliminating them is all bluster. In a way the people have a point. Republicans want to eliminate Medicare ever since it was enacted, but they get cold feet at radical solutions and try to chip it away over time in the hopes people don’t notice. Remember, they don’t believe Paul Ryan’s own plans because of how unbelievable it sounds.
Yes, yes, you are. if you want people to remember it, try to make it memorable. Does anyone remember any of the rebuttals? They remember Empty Suit Rubio, maybe. And we all know why that is, if they remember at all. Some remember Jim Webb’s, even if it turned out he was 95% full of shit. No one remembers any of the others.
You’re like a stream of consciousness of various things one sees on liberal internet thrown together in a word salad. Your argument follows a logical conclusion of “nothing matters, why bother responding because no one cares/remembers.” Same old nihilism.
It makes perfect sense to me.
White and Case: interesting.
Coal mine jobs were 1% of the Kentucky work force in 2008, something like 15,000, down from something like 45,000 in 1979. They were lost to automation before they were lost to the regulation in favor of breathable air that gives Kentucky voters such a heart pain, and to the fact that there’s not enough coal left in those seams to make mining it profitable. If it went down from 1% to 0.5% during the Obama administration, boo-hoo. It’s over.
I care more about the loss of blacksmithing jobs, to tell the truth. That really meant something. Best blacksmithing jobs in the world are still there in Kentucky, no doubt, but there just aren’t that many. By all means let’s encourage a return to the pre-Raphaelite socialism of fine work of the 1850s. Let’s make more really good cheese (and help me afford to buy it at the farmers’ marker for $20 a pound). But Mr. Peabody’s coal train left the station 40 years ago, having taken most of Muhlenberg County with it, as the song said. If they can’t get over it I don’t know what the fuck we’re supposed to do about it.
Maybe they’re pissed because nothing has replaced those jobs? Have you ever thought of that? I’m sure you’d be thrilled if you were laid off from your job and told you’d have to move 150 miles away for a new one, which would likely pay less. Not only that, but that you’d have to take a complete write-off on your house because no one would likely buy it.
It is sad really. Too bad we don’t have a political party that would help those people or their towns.
Skilled immigrants, but above all, immigrants.
In large numbers.
Might make a difference.
And they’ll be welcomed with open arms.
Interesting link, especially since I lived in the Mohawk Valley for many years a long time ago. It was what I would call a depressed area and the sort of place many folks move away from. In part of last century the textile industry thrived there.
Maine’s full of monuments to the first industrial revolution, too. Lewiston. Auburn. Waterville. Skowhegan. Sanford. Biddeford….
When we took my son out to Syracuse and RPI for campus visits, it looked a lot like home.
Same thing happening out in the plains.
I watched some of that happening first hand just a few miles further south not that many years ago. And when one looks at the population decline that was characterizing many of these communities, the new immigrants make all the difference between thriving communities and ghost towns.
THAT is what Davis’s link reminded me of.
I looked at Iowa. About half of the shift from 2008 t0 2016 on a county by county basis is explained by population change. Counties with stagnating populations shitted to Trump is a significant way.
My thesis is that as counties stagnated the young moved away to find work, breaking apart families. And political anger grows.
So I get the coal towns. They closed up, and it is just like when the plants closed. The area withers and dies.
I understand why they’re pissed off, Phil. I don’t understand why they keep voting for the one thing that is guaranteed not to help, a revived coal industry.
It’s like that old-time religion, it was good enough for grampa, it’s good enough for them.
apropos Prine refs. Might just have to go play Paradise here in a bit.)
Heh, I once met a Kentucky blacksmith, all the way out here in California. Now there was a guy that respected hard work and the people that do it.
His daughter, not so much. I met the father while working on her house, and he came out to visit. She later accused me of infesting her house with ants….THAT I BROUGHT FROM MY FILTHY HOME.
.
LOL — However could she stand her filthy father? I’m assuming he was a farrier type blacksmith?
The men and women farriers I’ve known for damn sure do a hard, dirty, sometimes dangerous* job, and I respect them mightily.
*Not dangerous around any horses I’ve owned, though; they’ve all been well trained to behave for the farrier. No cookies for bad ponies!
It had to do with WHERE I lived. Their house was in Solana Beach…I live further up the coast…in Oceanside. Oceanside is considered ‘affordable’.
I was working there as a favor for a friend that could not do it alone…and as is typical, he went on vacation for a week and left me….alone. He got back and I told him ‘your friends think I brought ants from Oceanside’. He was like, ‘no way, they were kidding you!’ So he goes in to talk to them, comes out and ‘yep, they’re absolutely convinced you brought the ants from Oceanside’.
I wasn’t there much longer. I just wandered off and never went back.
.
The NYTimes has a front page story similar to this about Arkansas. Seems there they want to get the lazy asses off the dole. So no Medicaid for you if you are not working, Just crawl off and die. And wouldn’t it be nice if all the states had block grants to handle their Medicaid as they saw fit, or not. Big Dog had the first idea about making people work for their free stuff.
This shit is not going to end well no matter what Beshar says. It is all too easy to blame it on the budget deficit and high cost, the free loaders and freedom. Screw this human right shit from the socialist left.
The human rights shit is not from the socialist left. It’s from the progressives who are reestablished their orthodox authority of the Democratic Party by electing Perze, Obama and Clintons favourite. Tet clear about it. Bernie Sanders tends to emphasise more bread and butter matters. Now, there’s a perfectly respectable expression whose time has come.
Maybe he’ll tweet us from the porch of his lake front home. I hear it’s nice. Paid cash for it.
.
Try FDR.
FDR doesn’t exist for Democrats, persona non grata, their all too cool for conviction and dedication nowadays, it’s all DailyKos snark.
I’m not sure I follow. But I don’t believe this is something we can abandon.
of the “the more progressive than thou” Wing of the party doesn’t exist either. You know the FDR who they said welcomed everyone’s hatred and why oh why can’t Democrats of today be like that? Of course that is ignoring that FDR kissed the backside of racist Southern Democratic Senators whose votes he needed to pass his New Deal legislation. For example throwing anti-lynching legislation under the bus to keep their votes, which was acceptable for reasons, while Obama trading away a weak public option to get Conservadems to vote for the ACA was not.
You know the FDR who took on Wall Street. Well except for appointing Joseph Kennedy, the ultimate Wall Street insider, as his first SEC chair which again was acceptable for “reasons.”
You know the FDR who cut back on New Deal spending in 1937 (even though he had a majority in both houses) to once again keep Southern Ds in the coalition.
I know. I know. It was a different time and we just have to understand that FDR had to make those compromises for the greater good and what kind of progressive Democrat am I to question anything FDR ever did.
Obama never traded away the public option. He continued to promote it before, during, and after the passage of the ACA. It simply didn’t have the votes.
Big Dog had the first idea about making people work for their free stuff? Now that is some prime grade baloney.
The Democratic Party coalition of the 1960’s was permanently destroyed by the successful passage of the Great Society programs, along with the Civil/Voting right Acts. The Dixiecrats and others in both Parties interested in slagging people with lower incomes had prevented non-white Americans from gaining broad social program assistance before 1966. After the Great Society was enacted, those same people began screaming out their “idea” that the poors were unworthy lazies three decades before Bill Clinton was elected President.
I wish that President Clinton had led a better defense of welfare programs in the face of the GOP-controlled Congress and his re-election campaign. But we have to be real about the fact that there are many Americans whose votes are animated by their strong belief that many people receiving government assistance don’t deserve it. The Democratic Party lost their Congressional majorities before Clinton signed welfare reform into law, and the prime issue the Republicans ran on against Clinton’s first Congress was the need to reform welfare programs.
Senator Sanders’s POTUS campaign talked very little about the need to restore welfare programs cut during the Clinton Presidency. Bernie made it his main pitch before the South Carolina primary, and barely spoke of the issue at all before or after. From a campaign point of view, I can understand why Sanders’ campaign did not highlight the issue. Social welfare programs are not popular with the general voting public. You and I can wish that were not so, but it is so.
Look at the Times story you referenced. People who run soup kitchens are quoted grousing about how too many undeserving Americans get government assistance. Even the woman whose story starts the reporting, a woman who lost her job and hadn’t found another one, a woman who is quoted talking about how badly she would be hurt if her Medicaid insurance were taken from her, a woman whose story exemplifies the importance of the ACA- even this woman complains that everyone should be made to work for their government assistance.
People spend many pixels here making the argument that Democrats have lost recent elections because they are seen as having abandoned the working class. There’s also plenty of evidence that Democrats have lost recent elections because they are seen as having given health care, food and housing to undeserving Americans.
The ACA is a huge social welfare program, and social welfare programs are not popular. Unless you benefit from them, a point the woman in the Times story makes crystal clear. “I’m a Medicaid beneficiary, but I DESERVE and need it! Not those other Medicaid beneficiaries!” It’s wildly flawed and prejudicial thinking, but elections are turning on it.
Trump and Republicans did not run very hard on “greedy Wall Street and financial institutions wrecked the economy”. They spent much more time running on “greedy browns/blacks/yellows/whites are stealing your jobs, health care and tax money.”
Spot on.
The difficulty of selling social provision in a country wher half of the political nation anyways doesn’t even think the word ‘society’ refers to an actual thing, is a huge, huge obstacle, one that can’t be hand-waved away.
Atomistic individualism is practically the state religion.
You cannot hand wave it away but you cannot lie down next to it and expect any meaningful change, if it has no meaning to you.
You made my point: screw this human right shit: ” even this woman complains that everyone should be made to work for their government assistance.” And Clinton was willing to help her along.
So now we have become like Trump:
“They spent much more time running on “greedy browns/blacks/yellows/whites are stealing your jobs, health care and tax money.”
Sorry but I don’t buy it. We will never win universal health care with this sort of prejudice.
I see that I misunderstood what you intended to communicate in the earlier post.
We can get the electorate more supportive of social welfare programs in the future. But having an Administration which will demagogue and scapegoat program beneficiaries even more brazenly and cruelly than past Republicans is most definitely a setback.
The good news is that public support for the ACA has sharply climbed in the last month or two. The behavior we’ve been seeing at Congressional Town Halls and elsewhere is symptomatic of a real change in the public’s view of the Law. Hopefully this uptick in both the number of people who publicly support the ACA and the intensity of their support can save as much of the Law as possible.
We’ve got to try.
I agree we have to push back on them or demand a better policy. We should not cave on health care. Block grants, reduced subsidies and work requirements can start small and add up to a disaster for people who really need it. There are many more problems that need to be addressed but I suspect the next four years it will not happen. Same sort of thing applies to SNAP.
FTFY.
I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of a lot of people around here. We don’t want to keep the status quo in certain areas because we like it, we want to keep the status quo because it’s a place to work from that’s better to work from than the Trump Alternative.
We still want and think more should be done. But all in charges of “Super Medicare for All or Bust” have failed and will likely continue to fail because the groundwork just hasn’t been laid for them to succeed, in our opinion. The fact that Millions of real people will be hurt or killed by such an attitude is just the clincher for why huge portions of the population are not willing to continually go on Pickett’s Charge with you.
following this evil idiocy from afar has him shaking his head sardonically, with the occasional mordant chuckle, over the corner rightwingnuts painted themselves into with the irrationalism of their anti-American all-obstruction-all-the-time opposition. Made even more “necessary” (to them) by the fact that they had insisted on attaching his name to it.
True or not, that picture provides me (and, I presume, him!) some tiny sliver of solace in the midst of this national nightmare.
If you brought up Tom Perez, Keith Ellison or Bernie Sanders in this thread, congratulations.
You lose.
The Pond has been poisoned. Too bad.
They’ll never get it. I work alongside them…they listen to too much Fixed News and Rush and InfoWars to ever hear a rational argument.