GUEST POST by Heather Scott (Spirit Valley Precinct Committeeman) —
My response, based on the input I received from the people within my precinct, is an emphatic NO on Medicaid expansion. People in my precinct are tired of government intervention and intrusion in their personal lives. They are tired of funding, through increased taxation, big government programs that need reformed, not expanded. The ever increasing burden of serial taxation by the federal government's ongoing mismanagement of tax dollars is putting many families in crises. An expansion of Medicaid can only come by raising taxes or reducing funding for other state programs. Everyone I spoke with in my precinct is already financially strapped and cannot afford any further reduction in their incomes.
I find the question being asked by the Republican Central Committee very odd based on the clear positions our party has already adopted. A quick review of our Idaho Republican Platform Articles show our party's clear opposition to expanding any government program by increasing taxes (see Article 1, Section 1- A, D, E). Furthermore, in Section 2 (A) we again state our opposition to higher taxes, stating that they are a "burden on businesses, families and individuals". In Article XIII Health & Welfare, Section 1, our platform states "we support a private enterprise health care delivery system that provides cost-effective, quality health care with minimal government regulation."
I have attached two supporting documents with footnotes detailing facts that I would ask all recipients of this e-mail to please read. In "The Final Days of Federalism" (Gray 2013), on pages 9 and 10, explains why our governor and legislators may have drastically changed their positions to support the Health Care Exchanges. The majority of the people in my precinct were angry at the way our District 1 legislators voted in favor of the state Health Care Exchange. They felt like their local legislators, their governor and the Republican Party let them down. After this poor decision to approve a State Health Care Exchange does the Republican Central Committee really want to turn away yet more of our republican constituents by appearing indecisive on Medicare expansion? An internet search on the idea of expanding Medicaid, indicates Idaho health care lobbyists have already made up their minds that this expansion is a good thing. (just like the health care exchanges) Expanding Medicaid is a horrendous idea. So let's take the correct stance this time by sticking to our platform ideas and not let special interest groups try to buy the morals of elected Republicans in an attempt to sway our decisions on what is really best for Idaho's good people.
On a personal note, President Obama stated he was in favor of a single payer, universal plan. Medicaid expansion is one step closer towards his goal. Expansion of Medicaid is part of the transitional process to entice more Idahoans into the federal system. When the federal monies (remember this is just a catchy term for dollars mandatorily extracted from our paychecks) stop coming, Idaho will then have to foot the bill of this budget killing program. Gray (2013) says it best on page 13 when he says "once states expand Medicaid and set up exchanges, Washington can easily decrease FMAP (Federal Matching Assistance Percentage) and gain control over the entire system. When states can no longer support the expanded program, they will have no choice but to turn Medicaid over to Washington. Washington can then merge Medicaid with Medicare and federalize the entire system. This will lead to a federal system."
The Final Days of Federalism? — CL Gray, MD, Physicians for Reform
Why the Obamacare Medicaid Expansion Is Bad for Taxpayers and Patients — Nina Owcharenko, Heritage Foundation
My response, based on the input I received from the people within my precinct, is an emphatic NO on Medicaid expansion. People in my precinct are tired of government intervention and intrusion in their personal lives. They are tired of funding, through increased taxation, big government programs that need reformed, not expanded. The ever increasing burden of serial taxation by the federal government's ongoing mismanagement of tax dollars is putting many families in crises. An expansion of Medicaid can only come by raising taxes or reducing funding for other state programs. Everyone I spoke with in my precinct is already financially strapped and cannot afford any further reduction in their incomes.
I find the question being asked by the Republican Central Committee very odd based on the clear positions our party has already adopted. A quick review of our Idaho Republican Platform Articles show our party's clear opposition to expanding any government program by increasing taxes (see Article 1, Section 1- A, D, E). Furthermore, in Section 2 (A) we again state our opposition to higher taxes, stating that they are a "burden on businesses, families and individuals". In Article XIII Health & Welfare, Section 1, our platform states "we support a private enterprise health care delivery system that provides cost-effective, quality health care with minimal government regulation."
I have attached two supporting documents with footnotes detailing facts that I would ask all recipients of this e-mail to please read. In "The Final Days of Federalism" (Gray 2013), on pages 9 and 10, explains why our governor and legislators may have drastically changed their positions to support the Health Care Exchanges. The majority of the people in my precinct were angry at the way our District 1 legislators voted in favor of the state Health Care Exchange. They felt like their local legislators, their governor and the Republican Party let them down. After this poor decision to approve a State Health Care Exchange does the Republican Central Committee really want to turn away yet more of our republican constituents by appearing indecisive on Medicare expansion? An internet search on the idea of expanding Medicaid, indicates Idaho health care lobbyists have already made up their minds that this expansion is a good thing. (just like the health care exchanges) Expanding Medicaid is a horrendous idea. So let's take the correct stance this time by sticking to our platform ideas and not let special interest groups try to buy the morals of elected Republicans in an attempt to sway our decisions on what is really best for Idaho's good people.
On a personal note, President Obama stated he was in favor of a single payer, universal plan. Medicaid expansion is one step closer towards his goal. Expansion of Medicaid is part of the transitional process to entice more Idahoans into the federal system. When the federal monies (remember this is just a catchy term for dollars mandatorily extracted from our paychecks) stop coming, Idaho will then have to foot the bill of this budget killing program. Gray (2013) says it best on page 13 when he says "once states expand Medicaid and set up exchanges, Washington can easily decrease FMAP (Federal Matching Assistance Percentage) and gain control over the entire system. When states can no longer support the expanded program, they will have no choice but to turn Medicaid over to Washington. Washington can then merge Medicaid with Medicare and federalize the entire system. This will lead to a federal system."
The Final Days of Federalism? — CL Gray, MD, Physicians for Reform
Why the Obamacare Medicaid Expansion Is Bad for Taxpayers and Patients — Nina Owcharenko, Heritage Foundation
No comments:
Post a Comment