This makes me angry.

Forums: Politics
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Boortz has this one wrong

YOU MEAN WE WEREN'T DOING THIS IN THE FIRST PLACE?

The state of Georgia has announced that it will begin assessing the estates of the recently deceased for the cost of providing them with health care under Medicaid. This means that if grandma sucks up $40,000 or so in Medicaid money during her lifetime, the state government will get first dibs on her bank accounts, her house, and whatever else she has after she dies. If there's anything left it will go to her heirs.

You just know that some of grandma's children and grandchildren are going to raise hell about this one. How dare the state try to get its hands on grandma's stuff? That stuff is theirs!

Sorry, freeloaders. Grandma spent the last few years of her life sucking off the taxpayers while she was sitting on that house and all those assets, and the taxpayers want their money back. If you were so concerned about being able to get her goodies when she died, why didn't you live up to your responsibilities to take care of her medical needs when she was alive. But noooooo. You decided to let the taxpayers handle that. Well ... we want our money back.

Thanks, Georgia.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,498 • Replies: 17

No top replies

I agree with you, McGentrix.

0 Replies

right wing thinking all the way. he's a dick. always has been, always will be.

this is the same government you support in the war. Now you disagree with them, so it must follow that you're not with the government. Ttherefore you must be against them. therefore you must be a french, terrorist, saddam loving traitor to this country. there is no middle ground, as you are well aware.

0 Replies

Just as an FYI, there were only 2 states that DIDN'T do this - GA and MI. The other 48 have been doing it for some time now (The law was put in place in 1993). OR and CT are supposedly the two most aggressive states at doing it.

http://www.cms.hhs.gov/medicaid/estaterec.asp

0 Replies

No sh!t! If they don't want people on medicaid, why offer it? People work their entire lives so they can have something for their children and the state can come in and take it because that person used a program the state offered?!

Grrrrr!

0 Replies

Research shows:

Are there times when estate recovery does not take effect even after the recipient's death?
Yes. The state cannot begin recovery efforts during the life of a surviving spouse, or while a surviving child is under age 21, or blind or disabled. This means, for example, that the state will not place an estate recovery lien against a home or other real property in a deceased recipient's estate while the recipient's spouse is living or while there is a child of the recipient who is under 21 or blind or disabled.

Can estate recovery every be waived?
The state may waive estate recovery (that is, it may agree not to recover) when it would cause an undue hardship on an heir. The waiver is limited to the period for which the hardship exists. Undue hardship is considered to exist when:

the property subject to recovery is the sole income-producing asset of one of the heirs whose income is low; or

recovery would result in impoverishment of one or more of the heirs; or

recovery would deprive an heir of shelter when the heir lacks the financial means necessary to obtain and maintain alternative shelter.

If an heir requests that the state waive recovery due to hardship, and the state denies the request, that decision may be appealed. The state's decision should explain how to appeal.

It's not as bad as I thought. If a person is using medicaid and has no family or heirs it appears as though the state has the rights to that person's property. At least that's the way it appears...

I am still mad that this could happen though. People shouldn't be required to have lawyers.

0 Replies

Yep.

This happened to my grandma. She spirited an old family heirloom necklace to me to avoid this -- she was very poor, mind you, but had wanted me to have the necklace and refused to sell it to have money for herself or have to turn it over.

0 Replies

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

right wing thinking all the way. he's a dick. always has been, always will be.

this is the same government you support in the war. Now you disagree with them, so it must follow that you're not with the government. Ttherefore you must be against them. therefore you must be a french, terrorist, saddam loving traitor to this country. there is no middle ground, as you are well aware.

well, no, see I have the ability to pick and choose what I am for and what I am against. I do not need to be all for or all against. But, I think you were just being melodramatic in your post...

0 Replies

Unless someone has outstanding debt, I don't agree with the government sucking money out of their estate after they die. And I don't think medicaid should be considered outstanding debt unless everyone is required to pay back the costs.

There's a big community of retirees here in Arizona. You see the retired executives driving a new Cadillac every year, and they get the same retirement benefits from state and federal as someone who lives on a measly Social Security check. There's a push to decrease benefits to retirees who are wealthy enough to pay on their own. I'm not sure I agree with that one either. They paid as much into the fund as anyone, shouldn't they get as much out?

0 Replies

T
T, I think you are mistaking Medicare with Medicaid. Medicaid is a state program. Medicare is a federal program.

BBB

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
right wing thinking all the way. he's a dick. always has been, always will be.

this is the same government you support in the war. Now you disagree with them, so it must follow that you're not with the government. Ttherefore you must be against them. therefore you must be a french, terrorist, saddam loving traitor to this country. there is no middle ground, as you are well aware.

well, no, see I have the ability to pick and choose what I am for and what I am against. I do not need to be all for or all against. But, I think you were just being melodramatic in your post...

and it's a happy coincidence that everything you're in favor us is in lockstep with the bush administration and any war actions.......

0 Replies

and amazingly enough you are against it...and the world keeps on turning.

0 Replies

Re: T

BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:

T, I think you are mistaking Medicare with Medicaid. Medicaid is a state program. Medicare is a federal program.

BBB

You're right, I did. In Arizona Medicaid is called AHCCCS and I found a page that talks about the estate recovery here. On pages 2 and 3 they talk about criteria to waive the recovery if certain hardship conditions are met. Sounds like they aren't completely heartless after all.

0 Replies

I dont get it. Medicaid is paid out of taxes, I assume? Everybody pays taxes, everybody gets Medicaid? So why the additional imposition on someone's properties?

You paid your taxes all your life, in return you get the government services those taxes pay for all your life - whether its the highways you drive on, social security if you're fired or health care if you fall ill. Thatd be my take.

I mean, where do you end up if you start with this logic? Those who drove a lot in their lifetime have their possessions impounded after death as a kind of retrogressive compensation for all the road-building that was done on their behalf? What about vice versa? If you die without ever having had to use much health care, can your family demand the money you paid to cover Medicaid back?

It's taking the whole underlying rationale and solidarity out from under the system of taxation. Perhaps thats the idea ...

0 Replies

This does sound appalling. Medicaid is a loan? What's next--the family pays back the Social Security benefits that a retired parent was getting?

Of course, this smacks of the desperation states are feeling re keeping these programs, e.g. Medicaid, viable. With the tax base eroding in so many states, it's hard to cover expenses like schools and health care...

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

I dont get it. Medicaid is paid out of taxes, I assume? Everybody pays taxes, everybody gets Medicaid? So why the additional imposition on someone's properties?

You paid your taxes all your life, in return you get the government services those taxes pay for all your life - whether its the highways you drive on, social security if you're fired or health care if you fall ill. Thatd be my take.

Medicaid is paid for out of general tax revenue but not everyone is eligible to receive it. It is primarily designed for low-income elderly people (there are others too but that's the primary purpose).

Nursing home care is provided for based on the person's income and the value of their assets. Even if you have possessions (such as a house) the government will not take them away from you or force you to sell them while you are alive to get under the asset limitations In effect, they wait until the person dies and recoup the costs paid for the nursing home care.

0 Replies

Fishin, I am fairly certain that in MA, this medicaid payback is a Romney initiative within the last year. I remember seeing it in the paper and bringing it in to show others.
Personally, I don't think it's necessarily unfair.
If you've got the money or assets to pay for your care, why shouldn't you?
many people live and die without inheriting anything (financially rewarding) from their parents anyway.

0 Replies

Oh, I see. Here's what you were talking about, Fishin:
An omnibus bill in Congress passed in 1993 directed all states to develop a Medicaid estate reimbursement program so the federal government could recover some of its growing Medicaid costs.
http://www.themonitor.com/SiteProcessor.cfm?Template=/GlobalTemplates/Details.cfm&StoryID

=2004&Section=Valley
And some other stuff; Interesting.
http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_reports/rep_index.cfm?DR_ID=22898
http://www.ma-estateplanning.com/article161.html
Critics say Medicaid bill may snarl home sales, insurance
Proposal creates unfair burden on insurers and working class, they say
http://boston.bizjournals.com/boston/stories/2003/03/24/story8.html

0 Replies

This makes me angry.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know