Arizona Medicaid considers tax on smokers, obese

[Kadie]

Arizona Medicaid considers tax on smokers, obese

By MARK CARLSON, Associated Press – 1 min ago

PHOENIX – Arizona's cash-strapped Medicaid program is considering charging patients $50 a year if they smoke, have diabetes or are overweight. A spokeswoman for the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System said Friday that the fee is intended to rein in health care costs by pushing patients to keep themselves healthy.

snip...
Some private employers and state governments have instituted higher insurance premiums for workers who are overweight or smoke, but Arizona's plan would mark the first time a state-federal health care program for low-income residents has charged people for unhealthy lifestyles.

The fee would apply only to certain childless adults.

One part of the proposal affects people with diabetes. Coury says diabetics who fail to follow their doctor's orders to lose weight would be subjected to the $50 charge.

more...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110401/ap_on_he_me/us_arizona_medicaid_obesity_tax

[abluelady]

1. And if You Don't Smoke

and you're thin, but your family history sucks, then what? How stupid.

[HockeyMom]

3. With my insurance, if you are 90 lbs, 5 feet tall

and have a "apple" shape of a 23 inch waist and 32 inch hips, you are just waiting for an heart attack because you store your fat (?????) in your waistline. INCREASE in your premiums. Excuse me? How many REALLY "fat" people would love to have a 23 inch waist?

[WinkyDink]

20. Somebody at your ins. co. is really screwed up.

[dixiegrrrrl]

42. Apple shaped issue was recently debunked, btw.

Read it here, few weeks ago, try Google for it.

[Warpy]

5. Agreed, this is just more bluenosed Republicans

who are trying to find out new ways to punish the poor.

I don't think they should be able to pass any regulations that don't also fall heavily onto themselves, assessing a fee based on the percentage a welfare recipient would lose applied to their own salary.

[KamaAina]

2. Isn't there already a tax on smokers?

And don't batshit-crazy repukes hate all taxes in every way, shape and form?!

[SoCalDem]

8. No .. they LOVE taxes that THEY get to levy

against the people they don't like..

The irony is that without those tobacco taxes, states are going to really be in a world of hurt when all the boomers, who started smoking when smoking was still "cool", finally die off..

It will be interesting to see how they balance the budget without those taxes...more lotteries I guess..

[demodonkey]

9. All boomers don't smoke.

Plenty of Xers and younger do.

Ageism isn't really helping anything.

[SoCalDem]

14. never said all boomers smoked..

we ARE the largest generation and we are aging, and many of us DID start that habit when it was still acceptable..

It's an undeniable fact that tobacco is one of the most difficult addictions to break..

My generation arrived in a hurry, and will probably depart the same way.. our demise will affect a LOT..including taxes.

you are seeing ageism where none exists...just plain ole math:):hi:

[demodonkey]

39. Um, yeah you kinda did....

Here's what you wrote. Boldface mine:

The irony is that without those tobacco taxes, states are going to really be in a world of hurt when all the boomers, who started smoking when smoking was still "cool", finally die off..

Sweeping generalizations about any generation are indeed, IMO, ageism.

As far as smoking being "cool" I still see plenty of teenagers and twenty-somethings puffing away these days outside buildings, malls, etc. It absolutely just breaks my heart.

[dixiegrrrrl]

43. Not to mention I know dozens of boomers who quit smoking ages ago.

And are saving a ton of money by doing so. None of my boomer peers smoke, I don't smoke.

[SoCalDem]

45. alas, a misplaced comma....and an inartful turn of phrasing..

all the boomers who started smoking when smoking was cool...

as in all the people who ate tuna fish...as opposed to all the people who ate roast beef :)

I think you understand my point..


nit, fully picked:evilgrin:

[Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel]

4. WTH "The fee would apply only to certain childless adults."

[freshwest]

15. Because they aren't pro-life. A backdoor taxes on those who won't marry, etc.

:sarcasm:

[krispos42]

22. And one that gays cannot escape

Because they cannot marry in Arizona.

[freshwest]

24. Unfortunately, it's a cruel game of Catch-22, or worse.

With more privatization, there will be more fanaticism in schools and other institutions (hospitals, business, etc.) and more extreme views will be mainstreamed. There used to be a good progressive internet radio station in AZ.I don't think they are there to lend their voice anymore. Guess it's all knuckledragging RWers now.

The cover for this is the fundamentalist religion thing. They're going to ruin the country at one level, but it's not really about religion. It's about corporatism, which Mussoline defined as a religion in itself.

Now that Giffords has been sidelined for a while, how are things going down there?

Apparently there's no movement to recall Brewer, fire Arpaio or any other number of thugs there. Any forward movement at all in coming elections?

[krispos42]

26. Dunno... I'm in CT

:-)

[freshwest]

33. Well, keep on hanging on there!

:hi:

[thelordofhell]

27. 1480 KPHX

http://www.1480kphx.com/

Giffords is making tremendous progress. Getting better and better every day.

recall jan brewer
http://www.recallgovernorbrewer.com/blog/?tag=dates-and-locations-recall-jan-brewer-petition-signing

recall russel pearce
http://www.blogforarizona.com/blog/2011/03/reminder-petition-drive-to-recall-sen-russell-pearce-saturday-march-5-2011.html

Unfortunately, with the state full of republican zombies, it will be extraordinarilly difficult (if not impossible in joe arpaio's case) to get these clueless asshats out of office. But don't say were not trying.

[freshwest]

32. Yes. That was the one I listened to. Glad to see that you guys are taking action, too.

Anything good going on there, really?

It seems as if the baggers have done exactly as planned, except for that immigrtion bill. A lot of social changes there designed to break up the Dem voters and supporters, and to influence the kids.

Interesting on that bill, is that the business community suddenly said it wqs costing them money this year (although I am sure they wanted to depress the labor market all along) and want it mitigated.

Made me suspicious that after the Chamber of Commerce or Koch goals of keeping a GOP majority came to pass, they decided to make nicey with people. I don't believe tthe demogogery used to get the base riled up and baggers elected was about the issues.

It was all simply about maintaining the Bush era tax cuts to ensure that permanent plutocracy they've been building. That was all the election was about, keeping that going.

All the social issues their media pushed were just dog whistles to appeal to the various GOP factions were nothing but but their way of energizing their base and getting them out to vote.

While on the other side, the GOP controlled media got the Demmocrats demoralized with half-truths about the Dems job performance in the Congress and White House. Playing both sides. The tactics worked great on both sides of the aisle. All lies. The truth is in the money, the numbers, and nothing else.

Thanks for answering and giving me a clue as to what is going on down there. I feel for you folks down there.

[thelordofhell]

34. Now it's time for my rant......stop calling these people "teabaggers"

They are all dyed in the wool republicans, every single last one of the fuckers. There are no teabagger Democrats. This is all a republican meme to keep blame from them...."Oh, it wasn't the republican party, it's the teabaggers, they're the crazy ones."....This crap just gives their pathetic party more media exposure. Here in Arizona, crappy republicans have been elected for years, we called them republicans. I'm not blaming the teabaggers for this shit sandwich, I'm blaming republicans.

:rant:

[freshwest]

37. I didn't separate the two. I know they are the same animal.

Wow, I was tired when I typed that. The spellcheck quit working after I got adblocking. So that may have been confusing.

Yup, the GOP is showing us their true colors. Nasty bastards.

[thelordofhell]

38. The rant wasn't specifically pointed at you

It's just that I'm sick of seeing the word teabagger when people should just use republican.

[freshwest]

41. We're cool. I just use them interchangeably. Ratbastards is copyrighted, I think, LOL.

[dixiegrrrrl]

44. Maybe can't marry, but not necessarily childless.

Many gays have children from marriages before they came out, or by adoption.
Funny how no one ever seems to think of gays as being married with children prior to coming out, but it is very common, yet seldom part of the stereo=type of gays.
Now let's talk about bisexuals, hmmmmmmmm?

[krispos42]

46. Oh, I know that... but having a child is much more complex and time-consuming than getting married

Although my soon-to-be-web brother may have a difference of opinion... :D


But, basically, a straight unmarried childless couple facing this issue could look at each other and say "fuck, let's just get married" and go down to the courthouse. Or they can just have a kid together with a romp or two in the privacy of their bedroom and pop out a little one 9 months later.

A gay unmarried childless couple can't do that in most states.

In many states they also cannot adopt a child, either legally or practically. Some states (Indiana tried this; don't recall it succeeded) tried to limit fertility treatments to married couples (de facto denial to gay people of artificial insemination). So, the gay people still have to have straight sex at some point in their life to get the exemption!

Imagine telling straight people "Okay, you can get this exemption but you gotta screw somebody of the same gender first".

:rofl:

[glowing]

6. And yet, in the school cafeteria they serve breakfast pizza, french fries,

cheeseburgers, and chocolate milk.

[me b zola]

30. yep, it ain't about helping anybody, its about controlling us. n/t

[Uben]

7. Why don't they charge republicans an ignorance fee?

I mean, dayum! Their ignorance has cost this nation more than anything else in the past thirty years, so we should tap that crowd and make them pay it back....say.....$500/ea for the next 50 years. Got my vote!

[Mimosa]

10. Prejudicial against Native Americans

Some years ago research into DNA had proven that because of centuries of a hunter gatherer non-agricultural lifestyle, people with Native American genes developed a more efficient fat storage metabolism. We get chubby (I'm not 'fat' but not skinny either) while eating about half the calories of the European DNA people. Travel out West and notice how many Native Americans are chubby.

Some Hispanic/indigenous mexican people have the same problem of efficient metabolism which evolved to protect people who had feast or famine cycles.

[Biker13]

18. Thanks For The Education!

I didn't know that! When I moved to Idaho, from the east-coast, I was shocked to see how many of the Native Americans were obese. They're all hard workers too, so I was surprised.

I learn something here everyday!

Biker's Old Lady

[anneboleyn]

23. Yes, I argued this in the LBN forum -- these "reforms" are clearly biased

The Arizona gov. is really, really evil as far as these "reforms" to medicaid are concerned.

[Liberal_in_LA]

25. lots of Native Americans have diabetes also...this tax would hit them harder

[Canuckistanian]

11. How about taxing the rich? Ever thought of that?

The rich! The people who can AFFORD a tax hike. How 'bout that?

Did it ever cross their nano-scale minds to TAX THE RICH?

Aw, fuck it.

[marions ghost]

36. Yeah those OBESE corporations...

n/t

[freshwest]

12. And the teabaggers are for raising taxes already? Running a govt. is a bitch!

Rush would cry nannystate and scream liberals trying to put his cigar out. Not to mention deny him some comfort food. Are they going to put a bounty on smoking and obese teabaggers?

:rofl:

[GoCubsGo]

17. Naw, Rush would find some excuse to support this.

The Arizona legislature is republican dominated. And, the legislation punishes the poor, who tend to be minorities. Therefore, this is perfectly acceptable in Rushworld. The teabaggers might not be too thrilled about it, however.

[freshwest]

21. Sure his listeners will agree, with their terminally short attention spans...

Be a little bit tough on teabag couch potatoes.

But their default to all their problems is blaming Democrats.

Yeah, it'll work.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

13. Millions of people have dead or underactive thyroids and can't lose weight.

All my life I have been nagged to eat more. I was not fat when I was a kid. My thyroid died when I was ten years old and I've taken Armour Thyroid ever since.

[freshwest]

16. They don't respect that...

[Manifestor_of_Light]

35. Waiting for the know it all physics major to check in here...

Some physics major always jumps in and says "If you take in more calories than you burn you will gain weight. If you take in fewer calories than you burn you will lose weight."

Human metabolism is far more complicated than simple thermodynamics. They don't seem to understand that.

Millions of people have hormonal/glandular problems because of the prevalence of autoimmune disorders (diabetes and Hashimoto's thyroiditis are two of them) and because of insane amounts of stress, which kill your adrenals, and who knows what chemicals that are in our air and water.

[WinkyDink]

19. Hello? Like there are no thin diabetics?! What about skin cancer for the sun-worshippers?

And so on.

[me b zola]

28. When can we begin poking our noses ito the wealthy's lives & making judgments?

---and passing penalties? Ugh to anyone who supports this shit.

[Taitertots]

29. More harsh regressive taxation

The program is only cash strapped because they don't progressively tax people enough in the first place. Claiming it as a reason to institute more harsh regressive tax schemes is total bullshit.

For some reason it doesn't apply to people with children. As if obese smokers with children don't increase costs.

[Hannah Bell]

31. If people can't see that this is 1) an incursion on the universality of medicaid & 2)

a policy that will eventually lead to a) More intrusiveness from gov't, health providers & insurers, 2) more paperwork & admin costs, 3) dropping people from the rolls, & 4) a model for private insurers, you're stupid.

For those of you who think it's "ok" because people are fat -- your time is coming, because it won't stop with people who are overweight.

[Xicano]

40. Next you'll be taxed more if you were born by parents who smoke.

Then you'll pay more tax if you're born into poverty because poor people are at greater risk of living in toxic and unhealthy environments. So on and so forth