It would seem as though some states have been unable and/or unwilling to protect the lives of their citizens. I can't think of states more in need of health care than some of the most impoverished in the Southeast USA.
My only concern is the funding states like Louisiana have already received under the Affordable Care Act and will not use as in the manner intended.
Citizens in states hostile to health care reform should have options open to them. I remind there are many families in Louisiana working as independent contractors to the petroleum industry living at the poverty level. The federal exchanges could serve as a means to health care insurance.
There needs to be an understanding at the federal level the South has a large number of independent business people with their service as their only income. That does not mean these are wealthy people or have the ability to achieve a wealthier status. The South really does impose a standard of living that requires good people to squeak by in life. An insurance requirement may be a burden to them unless there is an understanding the federal exchanges can actually help their status and not hurt them.
The definition of independent business person in the South is far different than it would be in other states of the nation. These people can be impoverished while primarily keeping their businesses afloat over and above their own well being and that of their families.
While I am on the subject, there are families in a quandary in North Carolina over what path they should take in regard to marriage to protect their children from any aggressive state policy following the passage of Amendment One. Marriage actually works against the most impoverished in this region of the country, even though they are independent business people. The circumstances are simply terrible and Jindle is a prime example as to why.
And let's get something straight. When a state legislature does not believe contraception needs, that was NEEDS, to be an option in health insurance and stigmatizes abortion and seeks to disenfranchise 'victims of harm' from reasonable legal recourse there is absolutely no way those elected are practicing governance. The North Carolina legislature is practicing victimization of its citizens for their cronies and the money they use to become elected.
The southern legislatures are about as lousy as they come. North Carolina will remove children conceived without the benefit of contraception, Plan B or affordable abortion from their mothers because they aren't married under the statute of Amendment One. They are ludicrous and stupid. Eric Rudolph the proud son of North Carolina's right wing nuts.
True story of southern victimization of the innocent. Ready?
There is a car accident. Four cars involved. It was literally bumper cars with one woman charged with reckless driving. Her insurance company postponed litigation for five years. Refused to negotiate with anyone for the first three years forcing all to the end of the three year statute of limitations.
The soft damage was significant and people were receiving treatment during this time. No one was killed. But there were injuries that worsened over time. After five years, people were placed on Social Security Disability due to their injuries.
Ready for this? The liability for the insurance company was the cost of treatment plus the MAX of pain and suffering of $10,000. The lawyers get one third, the doctors and hospitals get one third and the victim gets one third. Lives were destroyed, but, the insurance company walked away with minimal liability. Living is rough enough in North Carolina, but, it is hideous when one realizes the corruption throughout the state legislature is entrenched so deep people have lost their rights to compensation after other's mistakes.
It is horrible. The tort reforms the Republicans love so much have become victimizing. There is no balance in the governments in the south anymore, simply corruption.
Who is carrying all the liability for the dense corruption of the southern USA? The insurance companies? No. Their subscribers? No. The federal government carries all the liability for these states through Social Security Disability, Medicaid and Medicare.
The arbitrator in one of the cases was told the victim was now disabled and can't work due to the accident and was receiving SSD. The arbitrator/mediator stated, "Congratulations."
True story.
Then the Right Wing Tea Party victimizes these people further by attaching a social stigma of laziness and pathetic neediness. Amazing. Simply amazing.
When a state has disparaged lives through legislative cronyism there should be a mechanism whereby peer review by other states, a consortium if you will or the federal government, can determine the outcome to the liability when it ultimately results in federal spending of disability income. There needs to be a statute somewhere assigning liability equally regardless of the state where the damage happened, be it medical malpractice or auto accident. State Rights needs to have limits when the cronyism devastates peoples lives through no fault of their own.