•   
  •   
  •   

Opinion Dollars, Cents and Republican Sadism

06:35  12 january  2018
06:35  12 january  2018 Source:   nytimes.com

Utah Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch says he is retiring after four decades in Senate

  Utah Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch says he is retiring after four decades in Senate WASHINGTON — Utah Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch says he is retiring after four decades in Senate.Hatch, 83, says he's always been a fighter, "but every good fighter knows when to hang up the gloves.

Why? For a while you could argue that it was about cynical political strategy: Medicaid expansion was a policy of Barack Obama, and Republicans accepted the A.C.A. Medicaid expansion, which means that most of the money they could save by kicking people off would be federal, not state, dollars .

The Republican House recently passed a Homeland Security reauthorization bill with a rider that allows Trump to send armed Sign the petition: Congress must investigate sexual assault allegations against Trump.

a group of people holding a sign© Drew Angerer/Getty Images

Editor’s note: The opinions in this article are the author’s, as published by our content partner, and do not necessarily represent the views of MSN or Microsoft.

Loading...

Load Error

Democrats want to strengthen the social safety net; Republicans want to weaken it. But why?

G.O.P. opposition to programs helping the less fortunate, from food stamps to Medicaid, is usually framed in monetary terms. For example, Senator Orrin Hatch, challenged about Congress’s failure to take action on the Children’s Health Insurance Program, a part of Medicaid that covers nearly nine million children — and whose federal funding expired back in September — declared that “the reason CHIP’s having trouble is that we don’t have money anymore.”

Puerto Rico sets 90-day target for review of hurricane deaths

  Puerto Rico sets 90-day target for review of hurricane deaths Facing mounting criticism that his administration understated the death toll from September’s Hurricane Maria, Puerto Rico Governor Ricardo Rossello on Thursday established a 90-day process to review the causes of thousands of recent deaths.Rossello, through an executive order, directed Public Safety Secretary Hector Pesquera to lead an analysis of thousands of deaths that have occurred since Hurricane Maria hit Puerto Rico in September. Pesquera’s team is to present findings within 90 days, according to a statement issued in Spanish from Rossello’s office.

But is it really about the money? No, it’s about the cruelty. Over the past few years it has become increasingly clear that the suffering imposed by Republican opposition to safety-net programs isn’t a bug, it’s a feature. Inflicting pain is the point.

To see what I mean, consider three stories about health care policies.

Sign Up For the Morning Briefing Newsletter

First, there’s the saga of Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act. The Supreme Court allowed states to opt out of this expansion. But accepting expansion should have been a no-brainer for every state: The federal government would initially pay the full cost, and even in the long run it would pay 90 percent, meanwhile bringing money and jobs into state economies.

Ohio Republican Mandel drops run for U.S. Senate seat vs Brown

  Ohio Republican Mandel drops run for U.S. Senate seat vs Brown Ohio's Republican Treasurer Josh Mandel has ended his bid to unseat the state's Democratic U.S. senator, Sherrod Brown, citing his wife's health, Mandel said in a news release posted on the Cincinnati Enquirer website."We recently learned that my wife has a health issue that will require my time, attention and presence. In other words, I need to be there," he said in the release.

Democrats want to strengthen the social safety net; Republicans want to weaken it. But why?

Dollars , Cents and Dollars , Cents and Republican Sadism . Click here to open external link.

Yet 18 states — all of them with Republican-controlled legislatures, governors or both — still haven’t expanded Medicaid. Why?

For a while you could argue that it was about cynical political strategy: Medicaid expansion was a policy of Barack Obama, and Republicans didn’t want to give a Democratic president any policy successes. But that story can’t explain states’ continuing resistance to the idea of providing health coverage to thousands of their own citizens at minimal cost.

No, at this point it’s clear that G.O.P. politicians simply don’t want lower-income families to have access to health care and are actually willing to hurt their own states’ economies to deny them that access.

Second, there’s the issue of work requirements for Medicaid. Some states have been petitioning for years for the right to force Medicaid recipients to take jobs, and this week the Trump administration declared that it would allow them to do so. But what was driving this demand?

Trump: ABC News reporter 'should have been fired!'

  Trump: ABC News reporter 'should have been fired!' President Trump on Saturday took aim at a journalist who made a mistake in his reporting.Brian Ross, the reporter who made a fraudulent live newscast about me that drove the Stock Market down 350 points (billions of dollars), was suspended for a month but is now back at ABC NEWS in a lower capacity. He is no longer allowed to report on Trump.

Republican attacks on the safety net are about inflicting pain, not saving money. Mark Thoma 130d ago. Dollars , Cents and Republican Sadism - Paul Krugman.

In his article for the Times, titled “ Dollars , Cents and Republican Sadism ,” Krugman writes, “Over the past few years it has become increasingly clear that the suffering imposed by Republican opposition to safety-net programs isn’t a bug, it’s a feature.

The reality is that a vast majority of adult Medicaid recipients are in families where at least one adult is working. And a vast majority of those who aren’t working have very good reasons for not being in the labor force: They’re disabled, they’re caregivers to other family members or they’re students. The population of Medicaid recipients who “ought” to be working but aren’t is very small, and the money that states could save by denying them coverage is trivial.

Oh, and of the 10 states reportedly seeking to impose work requirements, six have accepted the A.C.A. Medicaid expansion, which means that most of the money they could save by kicking people off would be federal, not state, dollars. So what’s this about?

The answer, surely, is that it isn’t about saving money, it’s about stigmatizing those who receive government aid, forcing them to jump through hoops to prove their neediness. Again, the pain is the point.

Finally, there’s the case of children’s health insurance. Again, federal funding expired back in September, and millions of children will lose coverage soon if that funding isn’t restored. So what will it cost the Treasury if Congress does what it should have done months ago, and restores funding? The answer, according to the Congressional Budget Office, is — nothing. Or actually less than nothing. In fact, a 10-year extension of CHIP funding would save the government $6 billion.

Kentucky House speaker offers to resign in fiery speech

  Kentucky House speaker offers to resign in fiery speech The Republican speaker of Kentucky's House of Representatives has offered to resign his leadership position more than two months after acknowledging he secretly settled a sexual harassment claim and paid to keep it quiet.Jeff Hoover denied sexual harassment, but said he sent inappropriate but consensual text messages to a woman who once worked for the House Republican Caucus. In a blistering speech on the House floor, Hoover denounced his critics -- including Republican Gov. Matt Bevin -- for telling lies that he said were from the "deepest pit of Hell."But Hoover said he didn't want to be a distractionJeff Hoover denied sexual harassment, but said he sent inappropriate but consensual text messages to a woman who once worked for the House R

" Dollars , Cents , and Republican Sadism ," said the New York Times and Paul Krugman. More ridiculously, Jonathan Chait perceived in this a Republican concern that the "privilege" of healthcare "is being extended to the wrong kind of people."

Dollars , Cents and Republican Sadism . Republican attacks on the safety net are about inflicting pain, not saving money. By PAUL KRUGMAN. Op-Ed Columnist. Dollars , Cents and Republican Sadism .

How is this possible, given the roughly $14 billion a year CHIP currently spends on health? The key point, laid out in a budget office analysis a few months ago, is that many (but not all) families whose children are currently covered by CHIP could alternatively be covered by subsidized private insurance through the Obamacare exchanges.

Private insurance is, however, considerably more expensive than Medicaid, which uses its bargaining power to hold down costs. (The cost of private insurance has gone up even further now that Republicans have repealed the individual mandate, worsening the risk pool.) As a result, subsidies for private insurance would end up costing more than the direct coverage children currently get through CHIP.

And don’t imagine that, because many children thrown off CHIP would find alternative sources of coverage, the kids would be alright. For one thing, a significant number wouldn’t get covered: The number of uninsured kids would rise substantially. Furthermore, private insurance, which often involves large out-of-pocket expenses, is much worse than CHIP for lower-income families.

So Republican foot-dragging on CHIP, like opposition to Medicaid expansion and the demand for work requirements, isn’t about the money, it’s about the cruelty. Making lower-income Americans worse off has become a goal in itself for the modern G.O.P., a goal the party is actually willing to spend money and increase deficits to achieve.

Follow me on Twitter (@PaulKrugman) and Facebook.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.

Paul Krugman wearing a suit and tie© Earl Wilson/The New York Times

How senators voted on the government shutdown .
Legislation to prevent the government from shutting down failed Friday night in the Senate ahead of the midnight deadline. The total was 50-49, but 60 votes were needed for passage. Here's how every senator voted: Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, Republican: YES Sen. Dan Sullivan, Republican: YES Alabama Sen. Doug Jones, Democrat: YES Sen. Richard Shelby, Republican: YES Arkansas Sen. John Boozman, Republican: YES Sen. Tom Cotton, Republican: YES Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake, Republican: NO Sen. John McCain, Republican: Did not vote California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Democrat: NO Sen. Kamala Harris, Democrat: NO Colorado Sen.

—   Share news in the SOC. Networks

Topical videos:

This is interesting!