It got this writer thinking: $100 million over 10 years. That’s how much Gov. Haley Barbour said his Medicaid plan will save taxpayers.

That’s a nice chunk of change to most people in Mississippi. In fact, redistributing $10 million a year for the next 10 years would be a nice shot in the arm &045; wouldn’t it? &045; if that money was going right back into the taxpayers’ pockets, which it won’t.

You see, this is not a tax cut. It’s just a money-saving measure by which other programs will not have to be cut to pay for the exploded Medicaid benefits.

If it were a pure redistribution of wealth where everyone &045; even toddlers &045; got a little something back, then each of the 2.8 million persons living in Mississippi would get a check for a whopping $3.50. Just think, in 10 years everyone would have $35.

Of course, the state would never redistribute the wealth in that manner. If the state was to redistribute wealth, it would go back to the people who paid into the system. According to the Mississippi Employment Security Commission, 1.3 million people are employed in Mississippi. So, each year for the next 10 years, working taxpayers would receive approximately $7.60 back.

Man, that more than doubles what a person would get if we gave some money back to toddlers and retired folk.

The point in this rather asinine exercise is to show people exactly how much savings we’re looking at from the state. Per person, we’re trying to save $3.50 per year. Per working person, we’re trying to save $7.60 per year.

When you start breaking it down like that, $10 million per year for the next 10 years does not sound like near as much money. But that is Barbour’s intention with his Medicaid plan, the plan that has some 67,000 Medicaid recipients scared to death over whether or not they can afford their medicines they need to live.

Given, Medicare is suppose to pick up most of these people, but !most(R) is not enough when it comes to the well-being of our citizenry. If we cannot ensure every person the same benefits they have now, then it is almost unconscionable that they be taken off of the program.

As has been said time and time again, Barbour is not to blame for this problem. Former Gov. Ronnie Musgrove and the previous Legislature &045; which looks eerily like the one we have now &045; are to blame for the spending spree that landed our state in its economic woes. (To be fair, let’s throw in a downturn in the economy that stifled tax collections.)

Nonetheless, Barbour’s solution may not be the answer. This hardline stand against new taxes is absurd when you look at the fact that we’re talking a savings of less than $5 per person per year for the next decade versus grandma or grandpa not being able to afford vital medicines.

The state should have never extended the Medicaid benefits they extended without first ensuring a funding source was in place. But they acted in a foolish manner, and there is nothing that can be done to change that.

But now, Barbour is in essence trying to turn back the clock by lobbing off a group of people from the Medicaid program before they have to go. It seems a far cry from the &uot;compassionate conservatism&uot; of his party’s national standard bearer.

Perhaps instead of trying to turn back the clock, Barbour should swallow the bitter pill the Legislature refused to swallow when they extended Medicaid benefits. That pill: raising taxes to fund the program.

Surely $10 a year won’t break anyone, or perhaps even $20, and then we can fund education fully as well.

Sam R. Hall

can be reached by e-mail to

shall@sctonline.net

.