It was about this:
U.S. Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania has made clear he supports the Senate’s new health care bill, which is expected to be voted on this week. The Republican said on CBS’s "Face the Nation" Sunday the plan would "make permanent" Medicaid expansion and that the federal government would "pay the lion’s share of the cost."The eligibility continues - remember that? We all know that's BS.
"Remember, Obamacare created a new category of eligibility," Toomey continued. "Working-age, able-bodied adults with no dependents for the first time became eligible for Medicaid if their income is below 138 percent of the poverty level. We’re going to continue that eligibility. No one loses coverage."
But Pat said - he said it right there - that "No one loses coverage."
But his office has since clarified:
Steve Kelly, Toomey’s press secretary, said that when the Senator said "no one loses coverage" he was referring to federal eligibility for expanded Medicaid and was not saying no single person would lose coverage.So when he said "No one loses coverage" he didn't exactly mean that no one loses coverage.
How is that not a lie, Pat?
Then there's the funding aspect:
[Urban Institute Senior Analyst Matthew] Buettgens said moving a greater amount of the cost burden to states would leave them with difficult choices. To make up for the shortfall, they’d likely either have to raise taxes, pay providers less or cut Medicaid benefits. He said failure or inability to do so could lead to a loss in coverage for some individuals.Does Pat Toomey really think that the Republican legislature in Harrisburg will raise taxes to cover Medicaid for poorer Pennsylvanians?
"Basically if states aren’t willing to raise taxes, pay providers less or cut benefits they will have to cut enrollment," Buettgens said.
[Sara Rosenbaum, the Harold and Jane Hirsh Professor of Health Law at George Washington], said some states would likely make up for the increased costs and others wouldn’t, as the CBO projected for the House health care bill.
"But the notion that these people will continue to have Medicaid is just absurd," Rosenbaum said. "It rests on an assumption states will keep covering people as they are today once the enhancement money is gone."
Of course not. That's just absurd. They're gonna pay providers less (which will lead to lower benefits) or cut enrollment.
So Toomey is correct that eligibility for a certain class of adults who qualify for Medicaid under Obamacare and previously hadn’t continues under the Senate plan. But it’s possible, even likely, individuals enrolled in Medicaid under the Obama expansion would lose coverage if states decline to cover the shortfall they’ll face after the federal government reduces its share of expanded Medicaid costs.I'd go further. Since Pat Toomey has to know that he's presenting a, shall we say, less than accurate picture of his healthcare plan, one designed to let people interpret it in a way that's actually counter to reality, I'd have to say that he's guilty of a lie of omission.
We rule the claim Half True.
Politifact defines "Half True" as "The statement is partially accurate but leaves out important details or takes things out of context." Whereas I would have gone with at least a "Mostly False" here: "The statement contains some element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression."