Liberal Forum

Cannonpointer » Today, 12:29 pm » wrote: ↑

Today, 12:29 pm

Are you sure that medicaid is BEING cut?
If so, are the cuts specific and surgical?
If so, what is being cut?

Do YOU believe there is waste, fraud, and abuse within medicaid?
If you do, and it CAN be targeted, do you believe that we should?

If you can tell me what is being cut, I'll be happy to vote in your poll. Right now, I don't understand it.

Hey @Blackvegetable  . Watch how I answer questions after being asked the first time from other members. You should try it for once in your disgusting miserable piece of **** life. 

Are you sure that medicaid is BEING cut?

Yes. The House-passed over $700 billion in Medicaid reductions over 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

If so, are the cuts specific and surgical?

Yes, and they focus mainly on:

• New work requirements for adult recipients (including some parents and caretakers)
• Tightened eligibility and verification processes, which means some people will be dropped for paperwork issues, even if they still qualify
• Prohibition of Medicaid funds for gender-affirming care
• Slowing the growth of federal matching funds to states, which shifts more cost burden to state budgets

These aren’t random “fraud cleanups”—they’re broad structural cuts that make it harder to qualify and stay covered.

Do YOU believe there is waste, fraud, and abuse within medicaid?
If you do, and it CAN be targeted, do you believe that we should?

Yes, like in any large system. And targeted reforms to eliminate that are completely reasonable.
But this bill doesn’t separate waste from need. It reduces access for working parents, seniors in nursing homes, and disabled individuals—without first proving that these specific recipients are abusing the system.

So yes—there are specific cuts, and yes—I believe in oversight.
But I also believe broad-based removal of care is not surgical reform. This part of the bill is assuming that only specific 'economies' within the whole economy is being affected. That simply isn't the case.