« Courts - More on: Differences in two cases on searching cell phones reflect the fast-moving evolution of cell phones | Main | Law - "A lawyer's troubles can leave a legacy of chaos: Clients' cases and money abandoned when a solo lawyer dies or leaves" »
Saturday, November 30, 2013
Ind. Gov't. - "Working-poor residents in similar circumstances face vastly different health coverage options, depending on which side of the Ohio River they live"
Sunday's Louisville Courier Journal will contain this very long article by Laura Ungar titled "Medicaid expansion's tale of two states: Kentucky 'haves' vs. Indiana 'have-nots'." From near the start of the story:
Working-poor residents in similar circumstances face vastly different health coverage options, depending on which side of the Ohio River they live.
It wasn’t supposed to work that way.
The 2010 law was designed to expand Medicaid to all Americans earning up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level — $15,856 for an individual in 2013 — allowing uninsured residents above that cutoff to seek health plans on insurance exchanges.
But the U.S. Supreme Court in 2012 let states choose whether to expand Medicaid, and as of Nov. 22, the Kaiser Family Foundation said only half, including Kentucky, had decided to do so.
Indiana is among the 25 states that have decided against it, effectively creating a double whammy for some of the state’s poor residents: Not only do they miss out on gaining access to Medicaid, but they must pay full price for plans on the federal exchange.
The ACA doesn’t offer health care subsidies to those earning less than the federal poverty level, because the law presumes they would be covered by expanded Medicaid. The nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation estimates 181,930 Hoosiers will fall into this “coverage gap.”
Posted by Marcia Oddi on November 30, 2013 08:27 PM
Posted to Indiana Government