Fact Checking GOP Hypocrisy on Federal Funds

The Montana legislature has proven itself to be more concerned with TEA Party orthodoxy than with our well-being, health, and economy. One of the most glaring examples of this is how they rejected free medcaid money for the Medicaid expansion–in a state where 16 percent of the population is still uninsured–in a state with the lowest percentage of employer-sponsored health care in the U.S.

When Montana TEA partiers and legislators try to explain why they refused money to pay for 100% of the health care benefits for 70,000 working poor Montanans for three years and never less than 90% of this cost, they try to make it sound like we’re taking on a “long-term liability” because they claim the feds will refuse to pay what they’ve committed to. Even thought this share is mandated by federal law–and even though this has never happened with Medicaid which has been operating in Montana since 1965. They say that accepting Montana’s share of this federal money makes us “lemmings about to jump off the cliff” and demand “belt tightening” to end the “tyranny” of federal funding.

Yet there is a mind-numbing level of hypocrisy on this front. It seems that some federal dollars are tyrannical lemming bait and others are not. Montanans welcome billions in federal funds that build highways, bring c130s and f15s to Great Falls, fight fires, clean up asbestos in Libby, and of course hand out  farm subsidies for Montana legislators. But when it comes to providing affordable health coverage to our working poor neighbors, some lawmakers want to draw the line. Why? Because they believe that federal funding for health coverage is somehow different than funding for concrete slabs, cleanup crews, or wildfire fighting camps. Of course, there isn’t any difference between these federal funds and the supposed dependencies they create—except in what the money pays for, and who it helps.

When Montana obstructionists refuse to accept these federal funds, they are saying that Montanan’s federal tax dollars won’t be put to work to help Montanans but will be instead sent to other states. The money won’t be circulating in Montana’s economy at all. This is beyond hypocritical: it’s just stupid. If a state rejects federal funding, that money is reallocated to other states. That’s how it works – those funds don’t magically go pay down federal debts. In when the Republican controlled house had a bill to change how federal appropriations work, the refused to even move it out of committee, so you know this is true, and its not going to be any different.

Next time you here someone trying to make the anti-federal money argument to hurt working poor families, feel free to set them straight.




11 Comments on "Fact Checking GOP Hypocrisy on Federal Funds"

  1. Correction, C130s and F15s were for Montana Air National Guard at Gore Hill in Great Falls, BUT still
    all FEDERALLY funded…………well said about the HYPOCRISY, and what about ‘Life, Liberty and pursuit
    of Happiness’, and how can our citizens do that without HEALTHCARE?

  2. Thanks for the correction- I’ve updated the post to reflect this.

  3. Apparently Steve Daines is getting the Majority of his donor money from Banks and Inversion specialists on Wall St who are now telling big American Companies like Pfizer to move to other countries. Goldman Sachs one of Daines bigest donors is estimated to have made $203 million advising on inversion deals since 2011. by helping companies in the United states renounce their American Citizenship so they dont have to pay American Taxes anymore. and sending their headquarters elsewhere in the world.


    • Surely Jobs going over seas is next and Because Steve Daines ihas now taken all this wall street money, he will be one of those guys that just allows American Jobs to continue going to other countries!

      • I agree. Steve Daines is a terrible person with dangerous ideas. We need to find someone to run against him.

      • Half of his slogan is “More Jobs”. I find it completely unsurprising that no journalist has asked him where or how these jobs will be ‘created’.

        • Rob,
          You’ve struck on something about Daines slogan that’s been bothering me for a while now. His “More jobs-Less Government” is totally backwards.

          Daines and his ilk don’t believe that gov’t creates jobs so how is he, as part of gov’t, going to create jobs? It’s an inane and meaningless slogan. I know, I know, they all say that but at least the D’s are more honest about gov’ts ability to create jobs (highways, construction, military, civilian personnel at military installations, prisons, etc).

          Plus as he’ll tell us (when he speaks at all) that the way he’ll create more jobs is by reducing regulation or repealing laws, giving the free market room to maneuver. Since any change to existing law or rules requires new rules and regs, if he did do something like that, it actually creates more gov’t!! Like I said, totally backwards slogan from the actual role that gov’t can play, but I’m sure it tested well.

  4. I think John Walsh should start campaigning on Obamacare expansion – a guaranteed winning issue right ?

  5. Turner maybe you should run- you have been a candidate before right? From many of your comments here I sense I would agree with you on most issues.

  6. I asked our Flathead Representatives to pass the Medicaid Expansion in during the 2011 session. I spoke with Wylie Galt, Carl Glimm, Steve Lavin, Randy Broedhl, Scott Regner and Mark Blasdel.

    My friend Lynn, Stanley is challenging Steve Lavin for that seat. Lynn, originally a Libby girl with all of the memories of what it is to know people who paid the ultimate price for asbestos and from tobacco spoke with other Representatives.
    Last winter I learned that Steve Lavin has a son that survived Leukemia. I am really glad that that family was able to get that taken care of before it was too late.
    I would love it if all people would be afforded the same.

  7. Remember nothing is free in life.

Comments are closed.