Medicare fraud = Sequester fraud

[specklebang]

This is what really annoys me about the childishness of this Administration.

Medicare Fraud Schemes Totaled $223 Million, 89 People Charged | LongIsland.com

Basically, the Medicare Fraud enforcement team has been collecting $8 in recovered money for every $1 of enforcement costs. A government department that actually runs at a porofit (and sees justice done). Something that they could brag about and we all would respect.

So, immediately. Mr. Holder decides to say that due to the terrible sequester, they might have to stop doing this enforcement. There won't be any shortage of give-away programs, no, just a program that actually pays its way by 800%.

Do these idiots even listen to themselves? You'd think they would be catching on by now...but they aren't. How can they be so dumb as to quash one of their few successes?

 

[Fisher]

I'm wondering if the medicaid rules will have to be changed. A lot of poor people will be forced onto medicaid, but I am pretty sure medicaid still has asset limitations, which would mean that there are poor people who were supposed to be helped by this who will be caught between the cracks if the asset rules for medicaid are not changed for them but they are not eligible for a subsidized private policy.

 

[head of joaquin]

I fail to see how you can blame the Administration for the stupidity of Congress's sequester. Under sequestration agencies have very little leeway on allocating the cuts. Indeed, if Holder did it any other way, he'd probably be attacked by the teapartycrazies in Congress as violating the law. Holder can't cut Medicare benefits, just what he controls -- enforcement. And my understanding is that since Medicare, like SS, is a pay-in, pay-out system, Obama can't cut benefits either.

Congress can fix this problem tomorrow. But it won't, thanks to the Tea Party Occupation forces.

 

[specklebang]

I genuinely hope you can enlighten me more on the sequester. I'm bright enough to understand it in principle and I believe there was a requirement to reduce spending by about 3%. So when they cancelled WH tours, I thought that was a bit dramatic. In theory, they should have REDUCED the tours, not CANCELLED them. But certainly we can all still function without WH tours.

But the enforcement issue? Why don't they reduce the Medicare Fraud enforcement team by, say, 3%, hardly enough to make a difference. Here's an agency that MAKES money, I would think this would be a priority. To save money, they could get rid of the DEA pricks who harass the medical marijuana dispensaries by say, 99%.

My question is real. Please let go of the anger and just clarify the structure of these cutbacks so I can comprehend what happened regarding the OP. I don't care WHY we have the sequester, I just want to know how it is to be applied.

I fail to see how you can blame the Administration for the stupidity of Congress's sequester. Under sequestration agencies have very little leeway on allocating the cuts. Indeed, if Holder did it any other way, he'd probably be attacked by the teapartycrazies in Congress as violating the law. Holder can't cut Medicare benefits, just what he controls -- enforcement.

Congress can fix this problem tomorrow. But it won't, thanks to the Tea Party Occupation forces.

 

[specklebang]

This agency handles Medicare fraud (Medicaid is a different horse I think) but even if they are the same thing, then it seems to me fraud recapture would be the #1 priority so that they don't run out of money sooner rather than later.

Medicare in particular is not means tested. All you have to do is survive to 65. The amount of fraud is ****ing astonishing - I'm a victim of Universal Healthcare Medicare who collected the fees and split the country. We're talking BILLIONS here.

I don't know what will "force poor people" on to Medicaid. The means test is fixed. Personal experience is my ex-wife got Medicaid until she got her $35 SS raise which brought her to $10K a year and bye-bye Medicaid.

I'm wondering if the medicaid rules will have to be changed. A lot of poor people will be forced onto medicaid, but I am pretty sure medicaid still has asset limitations, which would mean that there are poor people who were supposed to be helped by this who will be caught between the cracks if the asset rules for medicaid are not changed for them but they are not eligible for a subsidized private policy.

 

[head of joaquin]

I genuinely hope you can enlighten me more on the sequester. I'm bright enough to understand it in principle and I believe there was a requirement to reduce spending by about 3%. So when they cancelled WH tours, I thought that was a bit dramatic. In theory, they should have REDUCED the tours, not CANCELLED them. But certainly we can all still function without WH tours.

But the enforcement issue? Why don't they reduce the Medicare Fraud enforcement team by, say, 3%, hardly enough to make a difference. Here's an agency that MAKES money, I would think this would be a priority. To save money, they could get rid of the DEA pricks who harass the medical marijuana dispensaries by say, 99%.

My question is real. Please let go of the anger and just clarify the structure of these cutbacks so I can comprehend what happened regarding the OP. I don't care WHY we have the sequester, I just want to know how it is to be applied.

Who said I was angry?

The sequester requires that each program, project, and activities account be cut (PPA). That's the magic language. The problem is PPA isn't defined, nor is it possible to cut some PPAs and keep them functional at all (understaffed security is bad security, period). Agencies can dispense with some PPA accounts if it is deemed to further their agency mission to do so, for the benefit of some other account.

I suspect Holder cut Medicare enforcement because in the broadest sense, the mission of the JD is to prosecute cases in a manner that keeps the public safe (not necessarily fraud free). So the sequester probably forced him to kill certain PPA account to make sure terrorists and drug lords don't get off scot free.

In any case, I think the blame for that goes to the Tea Party Occupation forces, not Holder. They cut funding to the JD. That's stupid. The JD needs to be fully funded and have lots of money to do its job right. Period. Don't blame the JD if the baggers have made that impossible.

 

[specklebang]

I tried to find PPA but I'll need you to translate since I'm sure it's not Professional Photographers Association.

I question your claim that the JD is "to keep people safe". I think their job is to prosecute crimes that have been committed. Here was an agency that did exactly that and recovered hundreds of millions of dollars that could be better utilized. So, I have trouble agreeing with this.

Once I find out what PPA is, I'll be able to make a better response.

Who said I was angry?

The sequester requires that each program, project, and activities account be cut (PPA). That's the magic language. The problem is PPA isn't defined, nor is it possible to cut some PPAs and keep them functional at all (understaffed security is bad security, period). Agencies can dispense with some PPA accounts if it is deemed to further their agency mission to do so, for the benefit of some other account.

I suspect Holder cut Medicare enforcement because in the broadest sense, the mission of the JD is to prosecute cases in a manner that keeps the public safe (not necessarily fraud free). So the sequester probably forced him to kill certain PPA account to make sure terrorists and drug lords don't get off scot free.

In any case, I think the blame for that goes to the Tea Party Occupation forces, not Holder. They cut funding to the JD. That's stupid. The JD needs to be fully funded and have lots of money to do its job right. Period. Don't blame the JD if the baggers have made that impossible.

 

[head of joaquin]

This agency handles Medicare fraud (Medicaid is a different horse I think) but even if they are the same thing, then it seems to me fraud recapture would be the #1 priority so that they don't run out of money sooner rather than later.

Medicare in particular is not means tested. All you have to do is survive to 65. The amount of fraud is ****ing astonishing - I'm a victim of Universal Healthcare Medicare who collected the fees and split the country. We're talking BILLIONS here.

I don't know what will "force poor people" on to Medicaid. The means test is fixed. Personal experience is my ex-wife got Medicaid until she got her $35 SS raise which brought her to $10K a year and bye-bye Medicaid.

Medicare is exempt from sequester.

 

[head of joaquin]

I tried to find PPA but I'll need you to translate since I'm sure it's not Professional Photographers Association.

I question your claim that the JD is "to keep people safe". I think their job is to prosecute crimes that have been committed. Here was an agency that did exactly that and recovered hundreds of millions of dollars that could be better utilized. So, I have trouble agreeing with this.

Once I find out what PPA is, I'll be able to make a better response.

PPA -- programs, projects, activities. Those PPA accounts each get hit the sequester percentage, unless the agency mission is at stake. I would imagine the JD has thousands of PPA accounts. So Holder had to make a decision and fast.

Don't blame him for the bad policy. Cutting budgets in the middle of the fiscal year and forcing agencies to immediately make decisions about thousands of PPA accounts is stupid. It's all tea party all the time.

 

[specklebang]

You need to let go of the Tea Party and accept that some decisions are not, in fact, controlled by them.

This seems like a terrible decision. I've already explained why. Poor judgement particularly if there are no cuts to Medicare.

PPA -- programs, projects, activities. Those PPA accounts each get hit the sequester percentage, unless the agency mission is at stake. I would imagine the JD has thousands of PPA accounts. So Holder had to make a decision and fast.

Don't blame him for the bad policy. Cutting budgets in the middle of the fiscal year and forcing agencies to immediately make decisions about thousands of PPA accounts is stupid. It's all tea party all the time.

 

[head of joaquin]

You need to let go of the Tea Party and accept that some decisions are not, in fact, controlled by them.

This seems like a terrible decision. I've already explained why. Poor judgement particularly if there are no cuts to Medicare.

Well, I've explained how sequester works, and it's stupid. To blame agencies that have to implement such a foolish policy regarding thousands of accounts in mid-year and to do it fast, is dubious.

As to why we have sequester, it's clearly because of the Tea Party and its madness, but that's a separate discussion.

 

[head of joaquin]

By the way, I don't purport to really understand sequestration beyond the surface level I explained (so I'm not trying to act like a knowitall), but I suspect nobody really does. Which is another part of its stupidity -- it's opaque and undefined.

 

[austrianecon]

First off these cuts aren't cuts. The are cuts on budget increases.. the problem is Government can't cut projects (not like head start but Defense programs) right away. They have to start with furloughs since it only takes 90 days or so for it to be allowed while cutting programs in defense require Government to pay out 100% no matter what. As time goes on these cuts will happen on the program side as budget. For example.. there is no reason for the Justice Department or DHS to give money to a town to buy a Urban Assault Vehicle.

John W. Whitehead: Tanks on Main Street: The Militarization of Local Police

 

[head of joaquin]

First off these cuts aren't cuts. The are cuts on budget increases.. the problem is Government can't cut projects (not like head start but Defense programs) right away. They have to start with furloughs since it only takes 90 days or so for it to be allowed while cutting programs in defense require Government to pay out 100% no matter what. As time goes on these cuts will happen on the program side as budget. For example.. there is no reason for the Justice Department or DHS to give money to a town to buy a Urban Assault Vehicle.

John W. Whitehead: Tanks on Main Street: The Militarization of Local Police

This is a silly meme in light of inflation and increased population. They're cuts. Period.