[R]esearch suggests that Medicaid expansion has also reduced crime and gun violence. States that have expanded Medicaid benefits experience lower firearm homicide rates and see fewer individuals die from firearm injuries. In fact, in states that expanded Medicaid, there was a significant reduction of in-hospital deaths from firearm injuries. Medicaid expansion also helped reduce healthcare costs for patients injured by firearms.
Additionally, states that expanded Medicaid eligibility experienced lower rates of overall suicide and overall homicide, as well as reductions in various types of crime—including violent crime. The safety net of Medicaid and other benefits creates an environment with less economic insecurity and desperation, which is a major contributor to crime and violence, both against others and against oneself.
In other words, Medicaid expansion has made Americans safer from gun violence.
But by making it harder to access Medicaid benefits, Republicans will stymie the reductions in gun violence, violent death, and crime that we saw due to Medicaid expansion. Already, states that made it harder to access Medicaid have seen increases in violent crime. When Tennessee disenrolled residents from Medicaid, the state’s violent crime rate increased almost immediately.
— Alec Nguyen in Trump’s Cuts to Medicaid Will Increase Gun Violence
Spurious correlations cease to be spurious if they confirm your bias.
That’s science.
Cuts to mental health services through Medicaid will lead to more exciting events.
“Medicaid cuts would devastate mental health, substance use treatment services in red states
States that voted for Trump have more behavioral health problems — and higher rates of Medicaid use
By Miranda YaverJune 12, 2025
Yaver is an assistant professor of health policy and management and holds a secondary appointment in political science.
When House Republicans voted in the wee hours of the morning of May 22 to cut approximately $700 billion from Medicaid, they moved one step closer to rendering dangerously vulnerable the millions of Medicaid recipients struggling with mental illness and substance use disorder.“
MAGA may be right, what do we care if our neighbors are struggling with mental health issues, that certainly won’t affect us, right?
False… Miner49er
Trump didn’t actually cut Medicaid. The BBB, basically, cut the money fraud and people not actually eligible for medicaid and in effect will return the medicaid programs funding responsibility back to the joint funding status where it was legally supposed to be so the federal government is going to still be funding medicade, just at its legal level of co-share joint funding with states and with the fraud and ineligible cut off. So in effect what Trump via the BBB cut was not suppose to be there to begin with.
Whats been happening, overall: The medicaid program is legally suppose to be jointly funded, co-equally, by federal and state. But whats been happening is states started cutting funding for medicade and federal funding increased to make up the difference when those enrolled started increasing but it turns out a lot of these enrolled were not actually eligible and a lot of things were being done with the federal funding in blue states that were not suppose to happen and money was being sidetracked into other programs for agendas not part of medicade, for example, federal medicade funding was side tracked in California to pay unemployed ‘trans people’ a monthly ‘disability’ amount of $2,000.00 a month who did not qualify any longer for unemployment so they filed it under ‘medically related disability’ and it got charged off to medicade even though these people were not on medicade (called Medi-Cal in California). There was tons of this fraud stuff going on in blue states, they kept sidetracking federal funding into other things not medicade. As a result there was a lot of medicade fraud and wasted spending on medicade and tons of people not eligible on medicade that sky rocketed under the Biden admin with the addition of illegal aliens and now the program is so overburdened with paying for all this fraud and waste and ineligible people that its under threat of collapse. So it needs to be purged of this and the funding means returned back to where it was suppose to be legally and the states need to pay their co-equal share they were suppose to be paying. The only ones that are losing medicaid are the ones scamming it all this time because they were not eligible for it to begin with.
So when these morons start complaining about all these people loosing loosing health care because of cuts to medicade, yeah, the people loosing medicaid are those not eligible for it that the tax payer has been footing the bill to pay for.
Clarification for: “The medicaid program is legally suppose to be jointly funded, co-equally, by federal and state.”
“co-equally” … the federal government matches the state funding…thus co-equally funding Medicade.
Ice cream sales spike in the summer.
Shark attacks spike during the summer.
Ice cream sales don’t cause shark attacks.
Dropping the lazy ansld illegal aliens from Medicaid won’t increase violence.
It’s my understanding that thanks to the parliamentarian left in place by the RINOs, they weren’t able to drop illegals or gender denying medical services.
I don’t think that got much coverage because people would be pissed. Even normal Democrat voters understand that we can’t afford to pay for the world’s poor (to the detriment of citizens).
“It’s my understanding that thanks to the parliamentarian left in place by the RINOs, they weren’t able to drop illegals or gender denying medical services.”
People living in the U.S. illegally were already under law not eligible to enroll in Medicaid OR get Medicaid benefits except in one case – they can get emergency medical services (emergency medical services for them are billed to Medicaid under ‘Medicaid benefits generosity’) – before the BBB. Its been that way for years. So actually it was already illegal for them to be enrolled in Medicaid OR get Medicaid benefits to begin with and its simply enforcement of existing law to drop them if they are enrolled (and some states have enrolled some of them fraudulently and are adding more). But what ‘sanctuary states/areas’ have been doing mostly was in effect getting them Medicaid benefits quietly by indirect methods by other side programs in the state and then charging the costs for their health care off to Medicaid though ‘Medicaid benefits generosity’ by calling each time they get ‘health care’ an emergency of some sort. For example; Got a cold and congested? For us its a cold and we get congested and sometimes we might go to the doc if its a bad cold and we sometimes get some type of prescription depending on what the doc thinks and we either pay the bill out of pocket or our insurance covers some or all of the medical bill. But for illegal aliens in these side programs its always treatment for ‘life threatening upper respiratory infection’ to be able to call it an ’emergency’ and they bill Medicaid under ‘Medicaid benefits generosity’ this tremendous amount for ‘life-threatening-emergency treatment’ for a cold and the American tax payer (state and federal) picks up the tab, and in fact the American tax payer pays for that illegal alien twice each time – because of the way Medicade is funded with federal matching state funding, co-funding, it means the tax payer who pays state taxes has paid the tab with their taxes in the state and then again with taxes they pay to the federal government.
The Medicade program expects ’emergency medical services’ to be provided by hospitals, its the way the systems are set up – and the systems are run by the states. But ‘sanctuary states/areas’ got around this by not going to hospitals for illegal aliens for ‘health care’ but by using ‘minor medical’ and ‘community health’ centers.
When a person (not enrolled in Medicade) is unable to pay for emergency treatment (i.e. indigent, homeless, etc…) or does not have insurance coverage to pay for it, the hospital bills the states Medicade system and the system pays it under a ‘Medicaid benefits generosity’ category. This is also how people not in the country illegally get emergency treatment at hospitals paid for (how the hospitals get paid), if they can’t pay and do not have insurance, the hospital bills Medicade and the system pays it under a ‘Medicaid benefits generosity’ category.
But since the Medicaid systems are administered by the states, the ‘sanctuary states/areas’ have not recorded for ‘Medicaid benefits generosity’ category payments for illegal aliens for other than hospitals which the illegal aliens are not using for ‘routine health care’ instead using ‘minor medical’ and ‘community health’ centers that file their claims against ‘Medicaid’ as ’emergencies’ and these states pay it under ‘Medicaid benefits generosity’ categories. So these states and proponents of illegal aliens have claimed “Hey, look at the numbers of payments to hospitals, its really low so we aren’t abusing the system” when in reality they played a numbers and semantics game and kept it from being recorded by the ‘minor medical’ and ‘community health’ centers and were abusing the system to illegally provide ‘health care’ Medicaid benefits to illegal aliens, in effect a de-facto enrollment in Medicaid.
correction for “…and kept it from being recorded by the ‘minor medical’ and ‘community health’ centers…”
should have been…
…and kept it from being recorded for the ‘minor medical’ and ‘community health’ centers…
They’re always playing a numbers and semantics game. They lie about everything. It’s amazing how much money we throw away.
Sharks love ice cream. Especially landsharks.
doggone lazy anslds. i can’t even guess.
Giffords links to a CBS article to explain the cuts. Per CBS:
The bill imposes work requirements for some able-bodied adults and more frequent eligibility checks.
Translation: people have been taking advantage of welfare programs. We’re going to make sure people are really eligible for welfare.
Since we have RINOs in charge that like having a Dem Senate parliamentarian for plausible deniability of uniparty goals, the GOP wasn’t able to include language that banned coverage for illegals and gender denying medical services. Funny how that worked out.
The people most responsible for violent crime (young men) are the people that are least likely to need medical care. This is nothing more than typical Democrat hyperventilating (lying).
From their linked study:
It suggests that despite some indication that healthcare resources may play a role in population-level injury outcomes (i.e., Medicaid generosity), alone healthcare resources are not sufficient to disrupt the matrix of socioeconomic deprivation and policy factors associated with homicide or suicide.
Funding for this study was provided by the UCLA Fielding School of Public Health Gun Violence Prevention Pilot Grant.
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Dude you are lucky for mine never did appear.
the moderators were angry that day.
Part 1:
“[R]esearch suggests that Medicaid expansion has also reduced crime and gun violence.”
actually, it doesn’t.
Part 2:
The ‘research’ they are referencing covers 2012 -2016 and is a ‘longitudinal study’
First, with people involved, what is a ‘longitudinal study’ (research): Its a type of ‘subjective’ observational and correlational study that involves monitoring a population, the same members of that population, over an extended period of time.
This study did no such thing. It was a state-level study, not a national study and did not monitor the same members of the popualtion. It starts with this premise > “Firearm-related violence is a leading cause of mortality in the United States (US).” and claims “To examine how healthcare resources and social/firearm policy affect firearm-related suicide and homicide rates in the US.” – but its a state level study and excludes the role of healthcare resources (physicians, insurance coverage) within the US policy context.
But, it excludes anything else unless its Firearm-related violence – meaning – its starting with a premise and designing the study to only support that premise even though there may be other data that disproves the premise.
Then its not actually using the Medicaid program enrolled, the study is using the ‘Medicaid benefits generosity’ factor.
‘Medicaid benefits generosity’ is not Medicaid enrollment. In other words, they are looking at people who are already not enrolled in Medicaid but sometimes have their stuff covered in emergencies under Medicade if the person is unable to pay for the medical care and has no other insurance – this is basically what ‘Medicaid benefits generosity’ is.
But the big give away is right there in front of people in ‘jumble-ese’ with this > “The outcome variables were age-adjusted, firearm-related suicide and homicide rates. Predictor variables were healthcare resources (physicians, Medicaid benefits generosity) and policy context (social policy, firearm policy) with covariates for sociodemographic factors.”
This is a fancy way of saying > “We played with the numbers until they fit like we wanted them to and still did not come to a conclusion in our math but were gonna pretend ‘hey look, science’ like the data led us to what we started with even though we purposely left out confounding variables.” and in that the big clue to someway relate this to ‘healthcare’ is with this magical power of ‘Predictor variables’.
“Predictor variables” are factors used in statistical analysis to forecast or predict the outcome of another variable called the ‘dependent variable’. You can’t legitimately forecast or predict the outcome of another variable (‘dependent variable’) unless you include all the factors that can affect that outcome – they did not include confounding variables, which means their ‘Predictor variables’ was some hocus-pocus ala-kazam magic they basically made up.
So in reality:
“[R]esearch suggests that Medicaid expansion has also reduced crime and gun violence.” is false.
“In other words, Medicaid expansion has made Americans safer from gun violence.” > is false.
“Medicaid expansion also helped reduce healthcare costs for patients injured by firearms.” > is false
1. This “Medicaid expansion” was actually fraud and waste, and ineligible people being enrolled.
2. The study upon with they base their stupid missive is based upon ‘Medicaid benefits generosity’ (explained above) not being enrolled in Medicaid. That same ‘Medicaid benefits generosity’ is still there and will be there, it has not gone away and the BBB did nothing to that.
In other words…
Its another ‘junk science’ study and Giffords claims are lies.
So you are OK with more budget deficits, interesting position.
“The Congressional Budget Office estimates the bill would add $3.4 trillion to federal deficits over the next 10 years and leave millions without health insurance. Republicans and the White House dispute those forecasts.“
I found your analysis of the research above fascinating, what sort of degree do you have that makes you qualified to discuss the methodology of the studies?
“I found your analysis of the research above fascinating, what sort of degree do you have that makes you qualified to discuss the methodology of the studies?”
Its apparently one you don’t have. I do scientific studies with others frequently. I’m a physicists – no, not the blackboard type spending their life scribbling equations, my area is in applied energy physics where the money is – those other guys, 99% of them don’t make a good living. I know what scientific methodology is for studies, well trained and acquainted and experienced with it. And this is no different, its just different data set numbers and different names used, the math and techniques and methodology are the same – the flaws are easy to spot. Its obvious they tailored their study to support only their beginning theory. Its junk science. I’m glad you found my analysis fascinating, it was pretty boring to me.
“So you are OK with more budget deficits, interesting position.”
That is a lie. I never said or implied any such thing nor did I say or take or imply any such position.
You simply can’t post anything without lying.
“I’m a physicists”
Do you mean you are a physicist?
Or has your personality differentiated and you are indeed a group of ‘physicists’?
spell check got me, don’t have an edit function here or I would have corrected it. So spell check and spelling mistakes is a now a sin in your deranged mind too?
You just live to bitch about anything. You need some serious professional mental health help.
“You need some serious professional mental health help“
Wow, not only are you a ‘physicists’ you’re also a psychiatrist qualified to diagnose mental illness.
Impressive.
Wow, you really can’t read or understand what context is. Like, for “physicists” reading the part where I said “spell check got me, don’t have an edit function here or I would have corrected it.” (to ‘physicist’).
No, I’m not a psychiatrist and never claimed to be. I can read though, and the DSM-5 and research, using your posts, pretty much lays out that you are in some serious need of professional mental health help. There are multiple aspects you have expressed in your posts over time but especially with your lying. Almost every post you make has a lie or multiple lies in it, and its obvious some of them are intentional, but the really telling ones are the ones where you try to ‘re-frame’ things where it becomes deception and then when caught at it you try to lie your way out of it then try to spin away from it to move the goal post. Its called being a pathological liar, sometimes referred to as mythomania or pseudologia fantastica, its a behavior pattern in which individuals lie chronically or compulsively for lying’s sake, and that’s exactly what you do in your posts and its obvious. Not only that but the pathological liar tends to read and understand in a ‘confirmation biased’ manner to create a sort of ‘false reality’ they are comfortable with believing, and all this often leads to the liar becoming a threat to themselves or those around them and we see this in play today with the thousands of violent left-wingers. And this pathological liar thing is a defining trait of the political left-wing and we have seen it in democrat members of congress and left wing media.
Its how we can spot a left wing missive on line, there is always, at minimum, a ‘slight’ twist away from the facts trying to place it into a context where it obviously doesn’t belong but it fits in their ‘confirmation bias’ and you do a lot of this too.
Yeah, you need some serious professional mental health help.
my wife had physicysts.
“my wife had physicysts.”
Well, that’s relativity for ya and it was only a matter of time.
😁
Pete Hegseth Eviseractes Biden-Era Pentagon: ‘DEI Is Dead At DoD!’ – Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth speaks at the “Student Action Summit” in Tampa, Florida.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2C2-Pg9g-Gk
Actual military professionals find Pete Hegseth rather amusing in a tragic sort of way.
“Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth came across in the published chats just as might be expected for a TV anchor with negligible top-level national security experience. His boast that “we are currently clean on OPSEC (operational security)” is now a cringing metaphor for his greenness in his new job. And a post-strike round of clenched fist emojis and team self-congratulation in the Signal app seemed more appropriate for high schoolers than hardened national security operatives.”
‘Actual military professionals find…”
Some of them might. The majority of them in the military are happy with him trying to make the military, well, the military instead of a social justice DEI club dominated by mentally ill ‘sensitive’ trans people.
This sounds a lot like the rap they used to play whenever they talked about legalizing marijuana. It cures everything and the taxes will save the economy. Similarly they argued legalized numbers games (lottery) would lead to a renaissance in school funding and quality. Then darned reality pulls up uninvited and recites Rudyard Kipling’s Gods of the copybook headings.