Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Oh, Florida

Oh, Florida

It’s stuff like this, Rick Scott’s Big Reversal:

Governor Rick Scott expressed his support this afternoon for expansion of Florida’s Medicaid program, describing the decision as a choice between “having Floridians pay to fund this program in other states while denying health care to our citizens — or using federal funding to help some of the poorest in our state with the Medicaid program as we explore other health-care reforms.”

The decision is a major reversal for Scott, whose 2010 electoral victory derived largely from his fight against the Obama health law. It apparently came after furious lobbying by Florida conservatives and Scott allies to keep him from breaking ranks….

Michael Tanner, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, says he’s skeptical Florida will receive its promised money.

“Trusting in federal promises to give you money in the future is pure fools gold,” he tells me. “If Governor Scott hasn’t noticed, we’ve got a budget problem in Washington, and I’d expect Medicaid to be on the table when it comes time to cut. In fact, we already know that the Obama administration put a cut in Medicaid on the table briefly during cliff negotiations.”

Scott’s statement appeared to acknowledge this possibility.

“Legislation we would support would sunset after three years and [would] need to be reauthorized,” the governor said. “It would also sunset if the federal government backed away from their 100 percent commitment during this period.” However, Scott added, “I want to be clear that we will not simply deny new Medicaid recipients health insurance three years from now.”

Scott may face resistance in the Florida House. “The Florida Legislature will make the ultimate decision,” said Speaker Will Weatherford in a news release responding to Scott’s decision. “I am personally skeptical that this inflexible law will improve the quality of health care in our state and ensure our long-term financial stability,” Weatherford stated.

Video via Charlie Spiering, Gov. Rick Scott’s amazing flip-flop on Medicaid expansion:


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.



Very disappointing. It’s obvious Scott’s lousy poll numbers have spooked him from doing what’s right for his state.

This is winnowing the wheat from the chaff very nicely.

Matthew 7:16, “You shall know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thornbushes, nor figs from thistles, are they?”

Just. Sickening.

I just hope his reversal (and that of Kasich and others who were elected by the right on the basis of their small-government promises) has the effect of energizing right-leaning voters, instead of utterly discouraging them.

We’ll see.

0. An example in miniature of what Romney/McCain would be doing had they won.

1. Gov. Rick Scott’s amazing flip-flop on Medicaid expansion

What’s amazing about breaking the promise that got you elected? Read my lips: that’s standard operating procedure for a Republican.

2. It would be “amazing” if these jerks kept their word. It would be mind-boggling if they kept their word and articulated their position in a way that the voters found credible. Not one of these clowns since Reagan has even tried to do that.

3. Were the Reagan-Thatcher years a turning point in history, or a pause?

    gs in reply to gs. | February 21, 2013 at 3:07 pm

    This reminds me of Scott Brown blowing off the Tea Party after they got him elected in 2010. Alienating your supporters does nothing to placate your opponents. It emboldens them. And swing voters can tell a weak horse when they see one.

      Ragspierre in reply to gs. | February 21, 2013 at 3:35 pm

      If any of my fellow TEA Party people donated to Scott Brown with the expectation he would become one of us…or should be bought…

      they totally deserved to be disappointed.

      I expected Brown to be who he portrayed himself to be, and to represent his state. I do not indulge in magic thinking.

        That’s not my point. I voted for Brown—enthusiastically the first time, perfunctorily the second—, but I never viewed him as a conservative.

        The Tea Party worked their hearts out to get Brown to Washington. Once he got there, his idea of being “independent” was to “reach across the aisle” to his left and give the…cold shoulder…to his conservative constituents.

        That says something about his nice-guy image and about his political judgment. Yet way too many GOP officeholders—Rick Scott, apparently—pretend that this kind of behavior is statesmanship. They take us for fools.

        Meanwhile, this once- and maybe still-conservative nation is taken ever closer to a structural leftist majority. I hope we’re not past the point of no return.

          Ragspierre in reply to gs. | February 21, 2013 at 5:02 pm

          According to the Washington Post, Brown voted with the majority of Republicans 80% of the time.[69] In the same poll, “56% of Massachusetts voters believed he has kept his promise to be an independent voice in the U.S. Senate.”[70]

          So, according to the numbers, Brown was pretty much who he said, and did what he indicated he would.

    An example in miniature of what Romney/McCain would be doing had they won.

    I agree. Example: Romney had that disastrous interview during the campaign with David “Gunslinger” Gregory about how he liked some things about ObamaCare. Coupling that with his stout defense of the equally rotten RomneyCare I have no doubt that Romney would have pursued a mend-it-don’t-end-it approach to ObamaCare.

    At any rate, we are now seeing what Republican politicians can be bought off. Good to know for 2014 and beyond.

      Ragspierre in reply to rec_lutheran. | February 22, 2013 at 8:46 am

      “At any rate, we are now seeing what Republican politicians can be bought off.”

      First, Scott was not “bought off”. He caved in the face of some terrible and terribly powerful perverse incentives.

      Just like Jan Brewer in Arizona.

      Second, ShaaaAAAaaazam! Pols can be bought! (Name a point in history when that WAS NOT true, please.)

I contacted my Fl State Senator, and Fl State rep, both conservative Republicans.

My state Rep’s office told me calls were running about 30 to 1 against Gov. Scott. Scott has a 33 percent approval rating.

The FL legislature will probably not approve the expansion, but that’s not a 100 percent sure thing.

In the end Scott will not get what he wants, will earn himself a primary challenge, and we’ll end up with Crist as gov.

Sigh, as long as we keep the FL senate and house, (very likely) we’ll muddle through, but it isn’t going to be fun.

Mike – Central FL

    gwest in reply to Flashman. | February 21, 2013 at 4:34 pm

    A hopeful report. It would be interesting to hear what’s happening in Kansas (also with a republican-majority legislature.

I think Allen West should challenge Gov Scott in the primary!! Allen west for Governor!!!

The Republican Party is in a death spiral — of its own choosing.

I hate to annoy people by bringing any facts into this discussion, but “Medicaid Expansion” means individuals with annual incomes up to 133% of the federal poverty guidelines will be able to enroll in Medicaid.

The number depends upon family size. For 2013, 133% = $20,626 for a family of two and $31,322 for a family of four. A family of eight can qualify with an income of $52,708.

It goes up by $5,347 for each additional child, so once again there’s an incentive to crank out babies while on welfare.

Under ObamaCare, the federal government would pay the full cost of enrolling newly eligible people from 2014 to 2016, after which the share would gradually shrink until it reached 90 percent starting in 2022.

Another “entitlement” that will never go away.

Avik Roy at National Review –

“And while Washington is promising to fund most of Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion over the next eight years, it is almost certain that Congress will contribute less to the program over time, sticking states with the tab. Indeed, President Obama proposed to do just that in his budget for fiscal year 2013.”


As usual, The Wall Street Journal has an excellent editorial on Scott and the other nitwit Repugs who have sold out their constituents to the OBOZOCARE bait-and-switch rip-off.

The problem is the federal extortion. The federal government can threaten to withhold money. The people still have to pay federal income tax. So the feds get their money from Floridians but then cut off medicaid funding or maybe something else if Florida doesn’t go along. Maybe what Florida should have done is joined with other states that are refusing to expand medicaid and take some steps between those states to reduce medical care costs. Maybe create an alliance of states where providers and insurers can operate across state lines with one business entity rather than having to have a separate business entity in each state.

Maybe allow the creation of medical insurance pools sort of like credit unions are for financial services. Individuals and small businesses could band together and get group rates and these pools could contract directly with providers for services at wholesale costs.

Maybe they could adopt Texas’ style of tort reform where someone bringing a lawsuit that is ruled to be without merit must pay the defendant’s legal fees. Maybe adopt their limits on awards, too.

There are a lot of things the states could do but it would take time.

    A step in the right direction, at least:

    The Alabama House of Representatives approved another bill in opposition to the Affordable Care Act that would authorize a compact with other states to regulate healthcare.

    The bill by Rep. Mike Ball, R-Madison, would authorize Alabama to form a compact with other states to bypass federal regulations and let states administer programs like Medicaid through block grants.

    Under the idea, states would get a block grant equal to the amount of federal healthcare dollars given to their state, and states would be freed from federal regulations on how to spend the money.

    The compacts have been proposed in several conservative states. However, forming such a compact would need congressional approval, something that is unlikely to happen any time soon.

    The House voted 68-27 for the bill. Ball said the proposal would give states needed flexibility.

    “Should the decisions be made in Washington or should they be made in the statehouses? Ball said.

    Ball in a statement said by passing the bill, “Alabama is taking an important step toward loosening ObamaCare’s suffocating grip.”

huskers-for-palin | February 21, 2013 at 9:43 pm

Meanwhile, Oklahoma goes for nullification of Obamacare

Let’s not forget that Scott, along with the Bush family, with Bondi and Rubio and the rest of the minions tagging right along, was part of the machine that pushed Romney and also screwed West and Gingrich. It’s nauseating. Caution re Rubio.

It’s getting harder and harder to trust elected Republicans…we seem to be done to a half dozen that might be trustworthy: Cruz, Rand, Jindal, and then the picking becomes sketchy…

    Ragspierre in reply to princepsCO. | February 22, 2013 at 9:14 am

    Not sure what you mean by “trust”.

    I think you can trust them all to human and fallible.

    I think you can put delusional expectations on them, like gs regarding Scott Brown (above), in which case you will always invest trust where you should not.

    For instance, I trust John McAnus to act like John McAnus…for both good and ill.

    One of the lessons of the TEA Party era, I hope, is that we SHOULD NOT TRUST. We should elect the best people we can, AND THEN MONITOR them, correct them, and even remove them if they fail to comport to what they said they would do.