RSSBasic Health Plan cuts would hit hard locally
Yakima Herald-Republic
E-mail
Print
Comments
More 'Local'
- Yakima forum will lay out ways to fight gangs
- Will the public like Ike's new design?
- Arrests spark medical marijuana debate in Yakima
- Sunnyside police probe Saturday shooting
- Delegation seeks money for Yakima projects
- Boy not seriously hurt after being ejected from van
- Sinkhole closes part of West Valley road
YAKIMA, Wash. -- Kathleen Sattler pays $150 a month for coverage under the state Basic Health Plan for herself and two children. It's a good deal for the Selah single mom, and she thinks it's a good deal for the state, too.
Without affordable health insurance, Sattler and her kids likely would have wound up in the emergency room for routine medical care, a cost that gets spread to everyone else with private insurance.
"When you don't have coverage and you don't go to the doctor, things can end up being more expensive," Sattler said at a news conference Tuesday at a Yakima Valley Farm Workers Clinic in Yakima.
Sattler is one of 8,389 people in Yakima County who face the prospect of losing coverage under Basic Health, the state's pioneering plan that provides insurance to low-income working people on a sliding fee scale.
As the Legislature looks for ways to close a $2.6 billion shortfall, Basic Health is on the chopping block along with the General Assistance-Unemployable program for 20,000 people statewide with disabilities, roll backs in children's insurance coverage and cuts in funding for community clinics to care for the uninsured.
Carlos Olivares, chief executive of the Farm Workers Clinic, and John Vornbrock, chief financial officer of Yakima Valley Memorial Hospital, held the media event to publicize cuts that could land people in bankruptcy due to a medical catastrophe and increase the burden on clinics and hospital emergency rooms.
"Basic Health is targeted to hard-working people. It would be criminal to yank it from them," said Olivares.
Yakima County has more than three times the state average of people enrolled in the Basic Health plan. Eliminating it would increase the county rate of uninsured residents to 18 percent from about 15 percent. The state average is about 11.6 percent.
Statewide, 91,000 people are on a waiting list to receive Basic Health.
Vornbrock said the average family that has health insurance pays out at least $2,000 a year toward covering the uninsured. And the problem is growing, he said.
"We are seeing increasing numbers of uninsured at the hospital," Vornbrock said.
So far, solutions have been elusive in Olympia. Gov. Chris Gregoire has proposed that the state tap $780 million in new revenue to avoid eliminating services such as subsidized health care and college scholarships for low-income families.
She is hoping for $425 million in federal stimulus money, but that would go toward Medicaid, the state-federal program for the poor. There is also talk of closing tax loopholes.
"We know the state is in a difficult financial situation," Olivares said. "But we can't cut our way out of this."
* Leah Beth Ward can be reached at 509-577-7626 or lward@yakimaherald.com.
Alternative headline: "Proposed tax hikes would hit hard locally"
The way to get more people insured is to get more people employed. Raising taxes during a recession will only create more uninsured people. I'm tired of these agenda driven sob stories that are intended to groom the tax payers into accepting tax increases.
These welfare programs should never have been created in the first place because they are unsustainable and they cause people to become dependent on government.
No more sob stories, there are so many people on these government programs that could afford there own care if they didn't have new TV's, new cars and all the trappings of consumerism. If they want to put Ms. Sattler as an example tell us the whole story. Saying your a poor single mom doesn't tell us anything. 20,000 with disabilites? I know people whose goal it is to get disability and ride the gravy train. No more empathy, not the tax payers problem.
Report ViolationSome people's ignorance and insensitivity in characterizing everyone who needs public assistance as lazy and just out to live on the public "dole" is disgusting. So I suppose that if you have a TV you're living too lavishly to qualify for any assistance? Absurd. This whole "Welfare Cadilac" idea is a myth. Find me examples of people living lavishly and receiving public assistance. There are cheaters out there to be sure, but it's a tiny fraction.
Tell you the whole story about Ms. Sattler? How much more do you want to know? She and her children qualified for Basic Health, and with the proposed cuts, she won't.
"Tell you the whole story about Ms. Sattler? How much more do you want to know?"
Does she pay for cable tv?
Does she pay for cell phone service?
Does she pay for internet service?
How expensive is her car/s?
How expensive is her house/apartment?
Is she receiving child support payments?
Why isn't she married?
The point is that people are not entitled to other people's money just because they have less. If they are going to take other people's money, they should be required to exhaust all of their own resources before they are given other people's money.
Layne, what I am referring to is the people I see cheating the system, and it is not a tiny fraction. There are people who need the system but it is overloaded with people who will never put any effort into getting off of it. What I don't like are these "generalized" sob stories. Show me someone who through "no fault of there own" needs the system then I would agree with you. But people who make poor life decisions and then we have to pay for them? No dice.
Report ViolationThe Governor's proposed budget fails to raise sufficient revenue to maintain the state's tattered safety net for elders, the poor and people too disabled to work. When the economy goes down, these needs go up. All legislators, not just those west of the mountains, need to be accountable to the needs of their constituencies. One of the programs on the cutting block is medical translators.
The legislature has moved quickly to gain efficiencies in government, forcing cuts and furloughs. However, the gap is still over $2 billion. Eliminating non-performing tax breaks is one viable answer. Clearly, Boeing hasn't delivered the promised 1,200 additional jobs for the Dreamliner. Revoking the largest tax break ever granted by any state, $3.2 billion over 20 years, would yield about $150 million a year. I am certain that this would not cause Boeing to change course.
Raising the sales tax, property tax or the B&O is not the answer. However, broadening the sales tax to include all services would come closest to closing the budget gap and would be inherently progressive, because poor people use fewer services. I believe that most people would be willing to pay $1 more for a haircut in exchange for keeping 60,000 people on Basic Health.
Last year's budget cuts were drastic. Ask your legislators exactly what revenue-raising measures they support and if they add up to $2.6 billion, or just a tiny fraction of the goal.
The problem with socialism is that you always run out of other people's money.
Report Violationrjames, we are on the same page.
Report ViolationPopping out more kids to increase your medical benefits and welfare check is not making a living, it's a drain on society.
Report Violation"Why isn't she married?" You've got to be kidding. That is beyond ridiculous.
Generalized? The woman stood up there, gave her name and said that if Basic Health is cut, she will no longer be able to afford health insurance. What do you guys want, her federal tax forms for the last five years, pictures of her house to make sure that she’s living sparse enough for you? Who should be the one to go around and decide that people live with sufficiently few creature comforts that you will grace them with a few ohms for the poor? This isn’t the Soviet Union. There are rules and guidelines that prescribe how much money you can make, how many children you have to support, etc. and either you qualify or you don’t.
Have any of you ever volunteered at a food bank? Or volunteered at a shelter for the homeless? I have, and let me tell you there are countless people who, through no fault of there own need a hand. My best friend worked at Boise Cascade for 25 years, straight out of high school. Went back to school on a re-training program, got a job at way less then he was making and then lost it as the economy went south. He deserves whatever public assistance he can get until he can get back on his feet. Oh, but he has a TV and a car so I guess he should sell everything and live in a cardboard box first.
I would like to think that we are a compassionate nation, one that understands that by helping those who have less than we do we are lifting our country up and making it stronger. But today it seems there are more and more people who regurgitate right-wing talking points and the hateful tea bagger rhetoric instead of thinking for themselves. Sad.
Layne, do you read the other posts? We aren't talking about people who really need it. We are talking about the people who abuse the system and use it all there lives. That is not what it is for. Read the posts first.
Report ViolationOh I did read your posts rheitzm. Let's see:
"No more sob stories... No more empathy, not the tax payers problem."
You're talking about the woman in the article who had the guts to stand up and tell her story. Are you accusing her of being one of these people who "abuse the system and use it all there (sic) lives"? So you know someone who's trying to get disability who doesn't deserve it. Hopefully they won't get it. That doesn't mean we should abolish the program.
"But people who make poor life decisions and then we have to pay for them? No dice"
So I assume from this that you think that you are qualified to be the Life Decisions policeman? Just because a woman has an unplanned child, does that mean that the child does not deserve to have food, shelter, and healthcare? That's what a compassionate country does; it takes care of its people, even if they have made some poor decisions. Then maybe that child, who at least had the chance to grow up with some of the basics, like Basic Healthcare, will become a productive citizen and make our country stronger.
"Popping out more kids to increase your medical benefits and welfare check is not making a living, it's a drain on society."
This is one of the most widely dispersed myths out there. Bill Clinton, yes Bill Clinton, in his 1994 welfare reform plan proposed to allow states to deny additional benefits to women who have children while they are on welfare. It passed and the first state to adopt it was New Jersey. A subsequent study by Rutgers University, commissioned by the state of New Jersey, found that the policy failed to reduce birthrates and the state conceded such 1997. Women have babies for lots of reasons, many of which are not what you or I might think are smart. In my 50 years on this earth, working with people of all walks of life, I have never known any woman who had a baby just to get more welfare money. This is a silly and cruel myth.
Hey Layne, you seem pretty smart but don't appear to get it. I am not accusing this woman of anything, I am talking about the people who abuse it. Obviously you are like our government, completely oblivious to reality. Go ahead and quote whoever you want. You are clueless.
Report ViolationYou accused me of not reading the posts. I responded to statements you made in your posts and all you have is name calling? I'm not the one here who's oblivious and clueless.
Report Violation
Posting Guidelines - Updated Aug. 21 2009
Readers are encouraged to use these forums to discuss issues affecting the
Yakima Valley. Debate the ideas presented in stories and other comments, but
refrain from personal attacks and offensive remarks aimed at others; e.g.,
you may call an idea idiotic, but don't say the person is an idiot. The
Herald-Republic reserves the right to remove any comment for any reason.
Examples include material that is obscene, encourages illegal activity or
stereotypes based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs and
other factors. Continued violation of these guidelines can lead to
suspension or revocation of your ability to post comments. If you believe a
comment is inappropriate, you can bring it to our attention by clicking the
"report violation" link by each comment. Guidelines revised Aug. 21, 2009.
Registered User?
