CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg

30%↑

15%↑

10%↓

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

50%↓

50%↑

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

35%↓

30%↑

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
January 24, 2012 01:51 AM UTC

Shawn Mitchell Giveth, And Taketh Away

  • 26 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

Folks, take a moment to read over Senate Bill 12-085, “Concerning Reductions in General Fund Expenditures,” as introduced by Sen. Shawn Mitchell last week. Pretty straightforward stuff, really, though we imagine Sen. Mitchell would prefer a longer explanation–SB12-085 is about throwing kids and poor people off insurance rolls.

Returns eligibility and services in medicaid and the children’s basic health plan to the 2006 level by:

Repealing eligibility for certain qualified aliens and their children, certain children in foster care, persons in the medicaid buy-in program, and childless adults;

Lowering the income level for parents of children eligible for medicaid from 100% to 60% of the federal poverty line;

Eliminating 12 months of continuous eligibility for children;

Replacing advanced practice nurses services with nurse-midwife services…

Eliminating presumptive eligibility for children and certain persons eligible for long-term care; [Pols emphasis] and

Lowering the income level for eligibility  under the children’s basic health plan from 250% to 205% of the federal poverty line.

We know that a lot of people, quite possibly a majority of any given cross-section of Coloradans, will blanch at the idea of tossing poor kids and invalids off of their coverage. But this is the kind of “tough love” that Republicans in both chambers are proposing. “Sorry, kids, but those rascally Democrats made promises we fiscally responsible Republicans just can’t keep.”

The problem is, with at least one of those provisions above–eliminating “presumptive eligibility” for kids and others who need long-term care (bolded)–it’s not just spendthrift Democrats to blame for dangling expensive promises of health care in front of needy patients, which Shawn Mitchell and his fellow Republicans must now do the responsible thing and eliminate.

In 2009, not even three years ago, Sen. Mitchell voted for presumptive eligibility.

It’s important to remember, and for Democrats to never let it be understated: every time a legislator talks about “cost-cutting” Medicaid, they are proposing throwing people–kids, poor families–off of their health coverage. It’s not some dry, sterile procedure where money simply moves (or doesn’t move) from a bank account. There are human consequences.

In this one provision among many such cuts in Mitchell’s bill, “presumptive eligibility” refers to providing long-term care coverage immediately for certain patients instead of the up to 90-day wait for normal Medicaid approval. If a patient is denied after this process, which involves a full declaration of assets, the state still keeps federal funds to cover providers, and either way a critical benefit is achieved by not making people in great need of care wait. Studies have shown in other states that Medicaid actually saves money when care can be administered sooner, before the patient’s condition further deteriorates. Presumptive eligibility for long-term care also prevents unnecessary hospital stays awaiting approval, and allows for better treatment options.

We assume Sen. Mitchell knew this when he voted for something in 2009 he now wants to take away–and knows it today, while sponsoring a bill to show the world how irresponsible Democrats are by eliminating a program he and many of his Republican colleagues supported.

At the very least, it makes you really value legislative sessions not followed by elections.

Tweet
Share

Comments

26 thoughts on “Shawn Mitchell Giveth, And Taketh Away”

  1. Agree 100% on LTC. What a bald faced asshole, and you know the TV news will forget to cover his original support. He’s counting on it.

    Maybe Mitchell never voted for automatic eligibility for babies the first year, but that makes me even angrier. Mitchell wants babies seeing the doctor less in their first year.

    Which means Sen. Shawn Mitchell wants more poor Colorado babies to die.

    Very pro life, Senator.

    1. These hypocritical GOTP pols are simply anti-choice or panderers to anti-choice. If they were really pro-life, they would be as passionate about doing whatever it takes to nurture, protect and preserve life with quality healthcare for all, especially the children of the poor, on the far side of the birth canal as they are about the protection of zygotes. Once those zygotes become born babies, their attitude is… tough luck if your folks can’t afford good health care, kids.

        2. Their whole attitude about children (meaning children who have been born, not fetuses) shows how little their lives mean to them.

          It’s interesting how laws change but social norms persist. There isn’t a person alive who was around when family members were literally the property of the father, but millions still adhere to that notion and fight hard against anything that takes the control away from dad.

    1. This is their “cost cutting.” This is their vision.

      More poor bankrupt people. More poor people in emergency rooms in the best case scenario. And more dead poor people who didn’t get treatment at all.

      Let it burn in, citizens with an ounce of humanity left in us. Let it burn in real good.

      1. somebody else. The GOTP pols who advocate it know they won’t be the ones suffering. Heck, they won’t even sacrifice a few percentage points of their tax breaks, a “sacrifice” that wouldn’t result in anyone in their families doing without a thing, much less dying for want of decent healthcare.  

        1. If you think that’s hot, we need to find you a better dating site. You can do MUCH better.

          He looks like every scuzzball jock and hallway groper I knew in high screwel.

            1. Don’t give any of these fellas idears now, you need a man who isn’t into politics. That way you get two votes!

              PLEASE don’t say anything to Scott Gessler, a lot of fine women I know have a good thing going.

              1. I mean maybe semi-political. Like, aware. Someone who reads now and then would be nice. But not someone who’s INTO politics on a really serious level. It’s too inconvenient not to be able to vent to anyone when they turn out to be full of shit.

                Doctors are my new thing since like, ten minutes ago. I’ve decided. Tall, dark, and handsome, preferably. Or CEOs. Someone who gets my ambitious self and isn’t freaked out by it, but a Mark Kelly type, someone who is all for the political thing but isn’t all about it personally. Got any of those in your back pocket?  

  6. Doctors are my new thing since like, ten minutes ago. I’ve decided. Tall, dark, and handsome, preferably. Or CEOs. Someone who gets my ambitious self and isn’t freaked out by it, but a Mark Kelly type, someone who is all for the political thing but isn’t all about it personally. Got any of those in your back pocket.

    еЏЈи‡­

  7. Doctors are my new thing since like, ten minutes ago. I’ve decided. Tall, dark, and handsome, preferably. Or CEOs. Someone who gets my ambitious self and isn’t freaked out by it, but a Mark Kelly type, someone who is all for the political thing but isn’t all about it personally. Got any of those in your back pocket.

    еЏЈи‡­

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

128 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!