Why are republican Governors screwing the private sector in their states?

[Lightrise]

Several republican governors are refusing to respond to the requirements to set up provisions for Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act. By doing this they are campaigning against job creation to manage the effort that will benefit thousands of the nation's most needy people. It is perplexing that they would rather keep people on the state unemployment welfare program rather than tap those interested in serving their state in the Medicaid capacity. Why do these republican Governors resist executing the spirit of the rule of law and unnecessarily inhibit private sector growth within their state as a result of the expansion? I guess all of them hate grandmothers so they are just willing to pull the plug.

[ChiTown]

whose mult is this?

[Donger]

Are you a contortionist IRL?

[DementedLogic]

Perhaps you should look up federalism, and tell me how they are violating the spirit of rule of law.

[BucEyedPea]

One of the the silver linings in the ACA SC decision was that state's did not have to comply with Medicaid expansion. I see nothing wrong here. Nor do I like an expansion of more govt jobs when they have to be paid by taxpayers who are hurting.

[Lightrise]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

One of the the silver linings in the ACA SC decision was that state's did not have to comply with Medicaid expansion. I see nothing wrong here. Nor do I like an expansion of more govt jobs when they have to be paid by taxpayers who are hurting.

Well you misfired here. They do have to comply but they don't have to set up the exchanges. In other words if the Governor in Texas says no then people outside of Texas will have to fund Texas' welfare payment.

The fact is that affordable care will enable great expansion of jobs in the insurance industry, training, health care, and beyond. The expansion will alleviate problems in emergency rooms, cut costs with preventive care...good grief, there are so many private sector jobs at stake its unbelieveable this is not grasped by the obstructionists. I can understand Gov Perry thinking of only 2 of the benefits however, but on this one he fails the entire test. So if you live in a state that is acting you benefit...you'll just have to pay for the empty head in Texas

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by Lightrise

Well you misfired here. They do have to comply but they don't have to set up the exchanges. In other words if the Governor in Texas says no then people outside of Texas will have to fund Texas' welfare payment.

The fact is that affordable care will enable great expansion of jobs in the insurance industry, training, health care, and beyond. The expansion will alleviate problems in emergency rooms, cut costs with preventive care...good grief, there are so many private sector jobs at stake its unbelieveable this is not grasped by the obstructionists. I can understand Gov Perry thinking of only 2 of the benefits however, but on this one he fails the entire test. So if you live in a state that is acting you benefit...you'll just have to pay for the empty head in Texas

They do not have to comply with the expansion.

Those jobs in the insurance industry are still govt induced and not true capitalism. It's corporatism aka fascism. The costs will be passed along. No way around it.

[Direckshun]

While the question in the OP is stupid, the point is salient.

The Medicaid expansion is too good a deal for governors to pass up.

They are risking political suicide by rejecting it for their states.

[Lightrise]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

They do not have to comply with the expansion.

Those jobs in the insurance industry are still govt induced and not true capitalism. It's corporatism aka fascism. The costs will be passed along. No way around it.

I apologize I did not get that quite right, thinking more about the federal contribution into the program and the details of how that works. But it will be very complicated for states that do not move to comply. In the end legislators will refuse to support opting out because the constituency backlash will be severe and will easily alter the balance of power. It is as said above, an obvious political suicide. Look for some kind of compromise, even if the feds have to step in and fund it, the feds won't commit political suicide either. Pulling the plug on the poor, disabled and elderly is stupid, as is supporting the effort to do it.

[mnchiefsguy]

Mults, especially a Wickedson mult, should not be allowed to start threads.

[listopencil]

It's because the presumptive leader of the party isn't giving a clear message. Look at this campaign film:

[Chiefshrink]

Originally Posted by DementedLogic

Perhaps you should look up federalism, and tell me how they are violating the spirit of rule of law.

Yep ! It's called the 10th Amendment