SP.JPG

I still get a kick out of Munsterman posting comments on my site trying to win me over a few months ago, when he tried to tell me we agree on a lot of things, BAHAHAHAH. Then he pulls this spade;

We have to get a handle on unfunded mandates,” Munsterman said. “I believe that is a big portion of what is wrecking our budget.”

Medical expenditures cost the state $128 million in the most recent budget — 11 percent of the $1.1 billion budget. The federal government contributed $335 million toward South Dakota medical services.

Yeah, stab the working in the back, that’ll get you some votes.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgpa7wEAz7I[/youtube]

9 Thoughts on “Scott Munsterman. “I loathe the working poor, just ask me.”

  1. Ghost of Dude on October 29, 2009 at 11:56 am said:

    If Uncle Sam is gonna mandate something, he should pay for it himself. Our state is poor enough.

  2. Munsterman should walk a few districts and talk to people. He would get an education. He would find a lot of people who are drowning under medical bills who have insurance but it won’t pay for everything, or they have very sick children, or no insurance but work two jobs. There are a lot of stories out there, he should leave his ivory tower office and start knocking on doors.

  3. Costner on October 29, 2009 at 2:37 pm said:

    l3wis, I’m not sure you’re being fair here. It sounds like to me he isn’t so upset at where the money goes, but rather than the Federal Government is mandating a program that they aren’t willing to paying for.

    I’d have to agree. If the Federal Government tells the states they have to do something – whether that be building and maintaining Interstate highways or paying for medical expenses for Joe and Sally taxpayer, or meeting specific criteria for education… then they should fork up the funds to cover the expenses shouldn’t they?

    As it sits all they are doing is trying to shift their costs to the states so the federal deficit doesn’t grow even more, but essentially they are forcing the states to turn around and raise taxes to cover their increasing costs.

    This is probably one reason so many states are in financial trouble.

  4. Joseph Bryant on October 29, 2009 at 2:50 pm said:

    reply to Helga,

    Scott Munsterman has been out meeting the people, obviously because other wise this wouldnt be a newspaper article that has him saying we need to scale back medicad. Which I agree we need to. Medicad is something unlike Medicare the state has to cover alot of, it started out with us covering 30% and shortly it has climbed higher and higher with us funding more while elgibility increases at a even greater pace. We need to take a serious look at what needs to be covered by patients themselves and what needs to be covered by medicade.

  5. Well maybe states should stop shoveling so much money towards no-bid contracts and FTE’s we don’t need and start spending money on our needs, like healthcare.

    I just think keeping citizens happy and healthy is way more important then million dollar contracts to ad agencies for tourism campaigns that don’t work. I’m just saying.

  6. Ya munsterman has been talking to people. His meeting in Pierre had 10 people show up. 2 were reporters and Chris Nelson. Now that grass roots!

    Munsterman wants to make it harder to qualify for Medicaid. That’s wrong!

  7. There is a solution. Have a public option that everyone pays into based on your income. You would save states millions and more people would get covered.

  8. Ghost of Dude on October 30, 2009 at 6:34 am said:

    The only true solution is single-payer. But until we quit financing our budget with big loans from other countries, it isn’t feasable.

    Win the wars, cut the defense budget 10%, invest heavily in alternative energy at home, and then provide a single-payer plan that everyone pays into with supplemental plans offered by private insurers.
    Once we aren’t buying billions of barrels of foreign oil (I don’t care if it comes from Canada or Saudi Arabia), we can scale back our worldwide military presence.
    Making it an “option” will never work.

  9. What Ghost of Dude said plus we quit spending $400 a gallon for fuel. The Pentagon pays an average of $400 to put a gallon of fuel into a combat vehicle or aircraft in Afghanistan. The republicans whine about their tax dollars being spent but not a peep over $400 gas nor billions on 2 wars.

    http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/63407-400gallon-gas-another-cost-of-war-in-afghanistan-

Post Navigation