This is more of a public service announcement, not another diary pointing out the defects in Obamacare.
Two sources, Washington Post and Fox. Seriously, if you happen to have minimum income, but have assets like a home and need health insurance, and the Obamacare Exchange points you toward Medicaid eligibility, run for the hills. Here is why:
Apparently, Obamacare has expanded the Medicaid roles. However, the states are allowed to recoup the costs of medical care by putting a claim on a deceased person’s assets. Now, some will say not to worry, the state won’t come after your home for the cost of Medicaid. Now, you can whistle through the graveyard if you like, but people are taking the cautionary side, and bypassing Medicaid for this very reason.
“A 54-year-old former lawyer from New York City, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because she will be looking for a job soon, said that despite the prospect of free insurance, she did not enroll in Medicaid because she owns an $850,000 apartment she hopes to bequeath to a family member.
“I don’t want my assets to be raided after my death,” she said. “The idea that someone can come after my house after I die — I just can’t do it.”
“Many of the new Medicaid recipients are in a similar situation as Olin and the former lawyer — people in their 50s and 60s who have homes but not jobs and are living off meager withdrawals from their savings. Medicaid was supposed to serve as a health insurance bridge for these people until they turned 65 and could receive Medicare.”
Now the good news is there is no asset recovery if you get a subsidy on a health insurance plan (tax implicationss if your income rises, but that’s another issue). But when it comes it Medicaid, buyer beware!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/little-known-aspect-of-medicaid-now-causing-people-to-avoid-coverage/2014/01/23/deda52e2-794e-11e3-8963-b4b654bcc9b2_story.html
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/23/obamacare-death-debt-states-can-seize-assets-to-recoup-medicaid-costs/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxnews%2Fmost-popular+%28Internal+-+Most+Popular+Content%29
johnk says
the language was of of the original legislation from 1965. This has absolutely nothing to do with the Affordable Care Act.
Dan, these scare tactics didn’t work, people are getting health care. You want to scare seniors, go fucking nuts, enjoy yourself. Hope you are happy when they need it and they don’t have the coverage needed.
danfromwaltham says
If one is 55 and owns a home outright and has little income, perhaps living off some liquid assets, and needs health insurance, would you JohnK recommend they go Medicaid if they are eligible?
I would not johnk, b/c of the provisions which allow states to tag assets.
mike_cote says
Seriously, Fox News, they do nothing but bash and BS the ACA 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. And you expect anyone to take them seriously.
Some fear, you have lost your mind. Including me, I fear you have lost your mind.
Mark L. Bail says
By all means, let’s change the law. It’s there to punish poor people for not being completely destitute. Just like this diary is Dan’s attempt to show he’s not completely destitute when it comes to saying something true. Poor Dan.
It’s true…: FactCheck.org writes:
But…
.
And about medicaid, Market Watch says…
On a personal note, my uncle is in a nursing home, and the cost is and will be diminishing his estate. This is a risk most of us run without long-term care insurance.
danfromwaltham says
Also, sorry to hear about your uncle.
Speaking of asset protection, remember this song? They couple had a TV show back in the 70’s.
Love, love will keep us together
Think of me, babe, whenever
Some sweet talkin’ girl comes along
Singin’ his song, don’t mess around
You just got to be strong
Just stop, ’cause I really love you
Stop, I’ll be thinking of you
Look in my heart
And let love keep us together
Captain and Tennille! Well, they filed for divorce recently and unfortunately, Captain has Parkinson’s disease and the theory is, they are divorcing to protect their assets, like their home, from Medicare and Medicaid, if Captain needs nursing home care down the road. I read even though they are divorcing, he will continue to live with his ex-wife.
http://blogs.marketwatch.com/encore/2014/01/23/did-insurance-woes-break-up-captain-tennille/
johnk says
Medicaid was passed with this language in 1965. What about that fact is difficult for you to understand?
kirth says
What’s difficult to understand is that the 1965 law made no reference to “Obamacare.” Surely the time-travelers who put Obama’s birth notice in the Hawaiian newspapers could have gone a bit farther back, and put a reference to the ACA in that Medicare law.
danfromwaltham says
We have evidence of Americans, who happen to be in a good financial situation, who own their homes outright and are semi-retired, living on their savings untile they find a job commensurate with their skill set.
Since they don’t show much income, the Obamacare Exchanges are directed them to Medicaid. This is equivalent of pigs being led to the slaughter house. Thank goodness these Americans discovered they are risking their homes and are forgoing Medicaid.
So, would you Johnk suggest anyone in their mid 50’s, who owns a home outright, and is eligible for Medicaid, to accept this program for their health insurance? Yes or no?
kbusch says
So good for johnk.
Please everyone, keep this up. We need to even the score!
Mark L. Bail says
and publish a diary about who is affected by this loophole in Massachusetts and how it is applied here. It’s treated differently in different states. If you’re concerned about it, then inform people about how it affects them.
I know you’re really only interested in bashing Obamacare, but here’s an opportunity to contribute something of value, limited value, but value nonetheless.
centralmassdad says
This has been the case for many decades. Many estate-planning lawyers have a brisk business doing Medicaid planning, so that end-of-life nursing home care does not diminish the assets that can be left to the next generation. So much so that in my view Medicaid is and has long been much more of a middle-class elder-care program than it is a welfare/poverty medical program.
The issue is that the expansion of the program brings more people into contact with the rules, earlier in life, and therefore is indeed a trap for the unwary– those who may not yet be at the stage of “protecting assets for the kids.” The good news is that few of those people make significant financial decisions in a state of complete ignorance, and word will get out soon enough, as it did decades ago. Also, in most cases, the cost of care for those younger people is not likely to be quite as crippling as the monthly cost of nursing home care.
danfromwaltham says
Because of the devestating effects this can have on individuals, I hope this diary gets promoted and should be required reading of every BMG member. Tweet it, Facebook it, get the word out b/c if we can reach just one unsuspecting victim, it is worth it.