Show #297, Airing Sunday, 5/15/05
When you die, should you be allowed to pass the family home to your children? Of course, most people would say yes.
But let’s change the picture a little. Let’s say your spouse had to spend time in a nursing home. After spending most of your savings, Medicaid covered the costs. When you die, should Medicaid be allowed to take your home in repayment of those benefits?
The Ohio House recently said yes, the state should be allowed to take your home. That’s what House Bill 66 provides. If the Senate adopts the same rule, the state will be permitted to claim your home at your death.
The supporters of this new law argue that if you received benefits from the government, you should pay them back when you die. And on the surface, that makes some sense.
But what makes Medicaid different from other government benefits? If you have to pay back Medicaid, shouldn’t the same rule apply to other government programs? Let’s say you own a home with a mortgage. The government gives you a major benefit: you can deduct the interest payments. This tax break may be worth many thousands of dollars over your lifetime. When you die, should the government be permitted to take your house, in repayment?
How about Social Security? Statistics show that many people are getting far more than they paid in. Should the government be allowed to take your home to recover the excess when you die?
Beginning in January, millions of Americans will be getting Medicare prescription drug coverage. Should their homes be taken to re-pay those benefits at death?
Many American students have benefitted from government subsidized school loans. Should their homes be taken to collect the taxpayer’s portion of the subsidy?
Millions of American farmers and small business owners receive valuable subsidies and benefits. When folks build their wealth thanks to government assistance, should they be allowed to pass it on to their children?
The government recently passed a major tax break for investors, taxing dividend income at a much lower rate than working persons’ wages. Should wealthy investors be required to make up the difference when they die by turning their house back to the government?
Of course, wealthy investors, homeowners, recipients of Social Security and Medicare, farmers and business owners, they will never be required to repay the government benefits and breaks that they’ve received. So why should Medicaid recipients be treated differently?
The answer is simple. People receiving Medicaid aren’t wealthy. They can’t hire expensive lobbyists. They don’t contribute thousands of dollars to the campaigns of politicians. Medicaid recipients tend to be older, sicker, and possess only modest means. It’s easier to balance the budget on the backs of the sick, the elderly, the poor and middle class. But is that the way to run a government of the people, by the people and for the people?
If you believe Medicaid recipients should be treated fairly, on an equal basis with other government beneficiaries; if you believe sick people requiring nursing home care should be allowed to pass the home to their children, then contact your state legislators now. The number is 1-800-282-0253. Tell them not to expand estate recovery to take our homes. Tell them to vote no on this part of House Bill 66. A comprehensive health care bill that allows people to be cared for with dignity, now that would be a much better idea.
