Deceiving voters – “It’s like déjà vu all over again.”

Posted on January 25, 2016 by Conduitforaction in Commentary, PO News and Commentaries, Private Option News, Scorecard/ Action Alerts // 0 Comments

During the Primary Elections of 2014 some candidates who voted for Obamacare’s Medicaid Expansion in Arkansas (Private Option), claimed the “Private Option was not Obamacare’s Medicaid Expansion and claimed that by passing the Private Option they had fought Obamacare. You would have to suspend all reality to buy the claim. Conduit for Action called “BS” on those claims and so did the voters.

Here we are two years later in another primary season and “It’s like déjà vu all over again.” Some legislators who supported Medicaid Expansion in Arkansas by setting up a task force with the duty to recommend how to continue Medicaid Expansion are using the deception again saying they: 1. Oppose Obamacare; 2. Oppose Medicaid Expansion; and 3. Supported Governor Hutchinson’s plan to end the Private Option (which is to give Medicaid Expansion a new name). Once again you would have to suspend all reality to buy their claim.

No matter what you call it, it takes your federal and state money and spend it on insurance for a group that is overwhelmingly able bodied working age adults with no dependents and over 40% of the group do not work at all, and the federal government won’t let you require them to work.

Since the same deceptive tactics being used again we are reprinting a 2014 article written by David Ferguson. The article appears below:

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

May 9, 2014

RECONCILING SEEMINGLY CONTRARY CLAIMS
ABOUT FIGHTING OBAMACARE.

By David Ferguson

A few Arkansas candidates who voted for the “private option” as state legislators are making the following seemingly contradictory claims: (1) I fought against Obamacare and Medicaid expansion; and (2) I support the “private option” which has nothing to do with Obamacare Medicaid expansion. Critics of these claims say the candidates are using political double speak to avoid a backlash from their base, which is made up primarily of people who do not like anything about Obamacare or government expansion.

I am happy to announce that I have discovered a way for these two claims to both be true. You only have to overcome a few problematic items. Here is a simple path to proving that the two claims can both be true.

All you need to do is demonstrate that:

The federal government must have lied when they say on their website that Arkansas expanded Medicaid.[1]
A multitude of maps showing Medicaid expansion states must all be wrong because each shows Arkansas as a Medicaid expansion state.[2]
It must have been a pure coincidence that the private option and Obamacare Medicaid Expansion both cover families up to 138% of the federal poverty level.[3]
Some unknown mysterious law must exist for Arkansas to get approval for the private option, since the only known authorization to expand to 138% and have the feds to pay for most of it comes from Obamacare Medicaid expansion.
The Arkansas Department of Human Services must have used the wrong form to get approval for the private option because the 1115 wavier is obtaining flexibility on financing Medicaid or delivering Medicaid services and is not for creating a program unrelated to Medicaid.[4]
The Arkansas Department of Human Services must have been confused when submitting the waiver application because the application talks about Arkansas Medicaid expansion, how the private option provides an option to traditional Medicaid delivery[5], and makes references to the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare).[6]
The federal officials at the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services must have been mistaken when they referenced Medicaid expansion in setting terms and conditions for Arkansas’s private option.[7]
The media must have been hypnotized into thinking that the private option is Obamacare Medicaid. Hypnotism victims include — the Arkansas Democrat Gazette[8], Harrison Daily Times[9], Hot Springs Daily[10], Southwest Times Record[11], Forbes[12], Los Angeles Times[13], Washington Times[14], etc.