Turns out, correct — or in this case, incorrect — interpretation of research has implications. Policymakers should brush up on the difference between correlation and causation. As Ben Armbruster reports,
During a long rant against government-subsidized health insurance today on C-Span’s Washington Journal, Rep. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) claimed that being uninsured is better than being on Medicaid — the federal government program that provides health care for low-income Americans:
CASSIDY: Medicaid, for your viewers who may not know this, is a combined federal-state program that insures, so to speak, the low-income folk. And it’s actually worse than the uninsured! So Medicaid, Medicaid patients in some cases have worse outcomes than patients who have no insurance whatsoever.
I can’t say this strongly enough: Medicaid is not bad for health. To believe so is to believe a rather far-fetched theory. Moreover, the notion that it is bad for health is not supported by the most credible studies on the subject.
Medicaid has problems, but making people sick is not one of them.
