Make money doing the work you believe in
As it so happens, on the media ecosystem, I caught a Washington Post Editorial Today from Jeff, attempting to bash the ACA and Medicaid, subject of major already-done damage which the Democrats were unable to prevent with the shutdown last year. I guess they are shooting for more, in this new vacuous-but-that-doesn't-matter-after-all editorial.
THE 7/15/26 WASHINGTON POST EDITORIAL
entitled
“Medicaid Fraud Control Units aren’t doing enough to control fraud Indictments and convictions are down, despite a surge in funding.”
and is here:
(NOT to be mixed up with the 7/10/26 Washington Post Editorial, which I find so problematic I have a full POST on it:
O.K. Fraud. Fraud with the ACA, and its associated “expanded Medicaid”, which is actually part of the ACA legislation, and did not exist prior to it. And everywhere else they want to shout about it—”fraud, fraud, fraud!”.
(Prior instances have been explored, and found false, exaggerated, falling short, vacuous, curious, etc. etc.
Such as the “phantoms”, which they had to switch to “ghosts” because they figured too many of those targeted didn’t know what the word “phantom” means:
Then you’ve got Dr. Oz, with his four wild deceptions, on the National Mall, as part of the new “Let Them Eat Pancakes” campaign:
Then you’ve got the huge and increasing coverage number drops are supposed to all be from stopping the fraud. (Baloney:
Then you’ve got the earlier leak from CMS that the false due-to-fraud explanation was coming
)
WOULD I GET TO THE POINT?— THE CURRENT 7/15/26 WA PO EDITORIAL!
OK, I will.
The editorial continues in the logically vacuous style of the prior one, apparently attempting to have people just see “ACA—FRAUD—BAD—STUPID DEMOCRATS WHO LET EVERYONE CHEAT”, which a certain class of minds take as equivalent to airtight reasoning.
So, that approach seems to be most evident at the very end, with, in the last paragraph:
“Targeting waste and abuse is necessary but not sufficient to save Medicaid, whose costs have ballooned in unsustainable ways because of the Affordable Care Act.”
This may need an explainer—as to why Medicaid costs have gone up—”ballooned in unsustainable ways” is, of course, wording chosen for the benefit of those who get mixed up between words and actual content):
Medicaid costs have gone up quite a bit with the Affordable Care Act, because a new part of Medicaid was added, expanded Medicaid.
Expanded Medicaid is part of the ACA, and covers about 20 million people now. It is the way people without other health coverage, such as from an employer, who are below 138% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL), get coverage. (There is no asset test—people below 138% of FPL get it regardless of assets—done to make the system airtight and leave no one out.) So, they get expanded Medicaid. (Without the expanded Medicaid, they would not have coverage unless they dropped down to being dirt poor in BOTH income and assets to qualify for traditional, pre-ACA Medicaid, which still exists.) The expanded Medicaid people cannot get subsidized on-exchange coverage, as the ACA structure prohibits them from doing that. This provision of the ACA was done as a cost-saving measure, to keep the lower-income group getting services paid for by the government at the lower Medicaid reimbursement rates.)
—-
Beyond the “fraud” and “ballooned in unsustainable ways” wording to manipulate the less-analytically-discerning, which is the apparent purpose of the editorial,
NOTE THESE:
BIG ONE, in the quoted text: “but not sufficient”!!!
More fully: “Targeting waste and abuse is necessary but not sufficient”.
Do you see that? Thinking caps, the logically capable. Those cuts from OBBB. (Not in effect yet. They go into effect right after the midterms. Coming. Sure to bring chaos and uninsurance to many.)
Begging the question here on “not sufficient” (in the old fashioned logic meaning—not the newer “raises the question” sense.)
Also:
We don’t see much in dollar amounts of the fraud. Keeping dollar amounts out of perspective is a repeated technique of these guys. A millions, a billion, a trillion—what’s the difference—they all rhyme, after all?
So, note total federal spending on health care is about $1.9 trillion a year. That would be 1,900 billion. (From kff.org/medicaid/what-d… )
Meanwhile, I don’t see any dollar amounts in this thing: thefga.org/research/ame… that the Wa Po editorial refrenced from this “Foundation for Government Accountability” think tank that they reference.
They also seem to have left off a comparator, that tax evasion in the U.S. is about $700 billion a year siepr.stanford.edu/news…
and I don’t have a number on loopholes, which would be separate. And I wonder how much the administration is doing about that. (It would be Scott Bessant, not Dr. Oz.)