In more than half the states, ObamaCare comes with an expansion of Medicaid. A 1993 federal law gives the states the right to recoup the costs of Medicaid by seizing the property of Medicaid recipients who have passed away. Source: Asylum Watch
If you cannot pay for your healthcare, and The People have to pick-up your tab, why wouldn't we put a lien on property, or garnishee future wages of those receiving unemployment benefits, or food stamps, until the debt is repaid to The People, even if only small amounts at a time? There's a good answer to that. Liens and garnishees are against living, breathing voters, but the dead Medicaid patient can't vote. Here's another question: if the value of the property seized by the government exceeds the outlay of Medicaid expense, is the overpayment given back to survivors?
As Jim at Asylum Watch says, "what we do not know, can indeed, hurt us."
Tom Gialanella, 56, was shocked to find out he qualified for Medicaid under ObamaCare. The Bothell, Wash., resident had been able to retire early years ago, owns his home outright in a pricey Seattle suburb and is living off his investments.He wanted no part of the government's so-called free health care. "It's supposed to be a safety net program. It's not supposed to be for someone who has assets who can pay the bill," he said.And after reading the fine print, Gialanella had another reason to flee Medicaid -- the potential death debt.Though many may not realize it, states are allowed to recover the cost of health care after someone's death by seizing their assets. It applies to Medicaid recipients who are between the ages of 55 and 64. The law has been in place since 1993, when Congress realized states were going broke over rising Medicaid expenses. Source: Fox News
AND look at this from Fox article linked above:
A Washington state couple in their early 60's actually got married recently so their combined income would keep them out of Medicaid and allow them to purchase a plan on the health exchange. Filing as individuals, their incomes had been low enough that they qualified for Medicaid.They married primarily because Sophia Prins owns a home and wants to will it to her children without any worry that the government will attach a lien for the cost of her medical care.
In 2004, California collected $44.6 million "through estate recovery," so yes, some Medicaid patients have assets.
I remember the case of my aunt and uncle who were not able to have children. After my aunt died, and my uncle was in his advanced 80s, with no income except his small social security check, he had a stroke, even though he had always taken good care of his health. He ate right, never smoked and didn't drink. He worked hard and was never on welfare. After the stroke, he was diagnosed with diabetes. He sold everything he had, which was little, but included a house. That financed his stay in a nursing home for a while. When that money was gone, he had to go on welfare. Then his leg was amputated. It took him a long time to die. He was of the greatest generation and that was his fate. He had done everything he could to do the right thing.
I'm torn on this issue. I believe if we have assets we should pay our debts, but as is always the case, many do not have assets and they don't pay taxes either. Those who do, in the instance of Medicaid, pay the debts of those who do not.
1 comment:
Liens and garnishees are against living, breathing voters, but the dead Medicaid patient can't vote.
If these patients are dead Democrats, they might get to vote anyway.
Post a Comment