Some said slavery would be impossible to get rid of. Same with other laws. Yet, we got rid of them. The web headline reads “Repealing health care law would mean higher costs”, while the Android app one reads “Health law locked in, experts say”
(USA Today) Republicans may not agree with President Obama’s State of the Union call to drop the idea of repealing the Affordable Care Act, but health experts say the law has taken such hold that it may be impossible to get rid of it.
The consequences of repeal, health care officials and industry analysts say, go beyond the fact that 9 million people would suddenly lose their insurance or that anyone with a pre-existing condition would either lose insurance or pay much higher premiums.
All consumers would take a huge financial hit, because health care costs would continue to rise, and insurers would probably recoup their losses by charging higher premiums.
Getting beyond the 9 million number, which has been beaten up by many fact checkers, the article mentions many cost savings portions of Obamacare that, supposedly, if they are done away with consumers will see their costs rise dramatically!!!!!!, dramatically, I say. Yet, the article never mentions that extra-large size deductibles which come with Ocare plans. Many of the Republican “replace” plans include market based solutions that would address those issues. Of course, many of the supposed cost savings are linked more towards rationing and government subsidies. If you read the ones in the story, one comes away with the notion that if that’s all there is to it, it won’t be that hard to fix. One is
Increased competition through federal and state health exchanges, which allow consumers to make direct comparisons of health plan costs and benefits.
Some exchanges feature just one or two companies. And consumers do not get the full details until they’ve provided The Government with all their personal data. Otherwise, they just get a brief overview and the costs.
It will be tough to repeal and replace Ocare. Any legislation will have to incorporate many of the popular ideas, such as not being able to be dropped because a person gets sick. And the plan will have to create a slow walk over at least several years where people are moved from the government option plans to other plans, without massive economic disruptions…or not, consider the massive market and consumer disruptions caused by Ocare, such as the 6+ million who lost their plans, with potentially tens of millions more coming in 2014 to early 2015.
But, nothing can truly happen unless the Republicans win the White House in 2016, and have control of the Senate and House. However, if a Republican does win the White House, he or she has quite a bit of power to change a lot of Obamacare, regardless of Congressional control. The ACA gives the heads of multiple Executive Branch agencies enormous latitude to create rules, particularly the head of HHS. The contraception/sterilization/abortifacient “mandate”? It could be whacked with the stroke of a pen, because it is a rule. The definition of part time could be changed. A good chunk of the tax rules can be deep-sixed. Calorie counts on vending machines and menus? Other insurance requirements? Gone. Change the rule on Congressional reimbursement for Exchange plans.
A Republican president can also rescind all the exemptions for all groups, companies, and unions who received them, who, strangely, were also big supporters of the law.
It won’t be easy, since nothing can truly be done till 2017. Do you know what else was hard? Sending men to the moon. Creating a nationwide interstate system. Building massive skyscrapers. Crossing the country in horse drawn wagons. Doing away with slavery. It takes American will and know how. And we can replace Obamacare with ideas and legislation that works for all Americans. There shouldn’t be losers.
Crossed at Right Wing News.
If right-wing reactionaries manage to repeal the ACA they must be prepared to replace it with a system better than the ACA and better than what came before.
If they can repair our broken healthcare system, reducing our total expenditures while insuring that every American has access to quality healthcare, they’ll have the support of most liberals.
Yeah, after all, the US had the best health care system based on outcome in the world.
Why would anyone want to go back to that?
gitar,
Best healthcare based on outcome? That’s a good one. We ARE consistently in the top 40 based on the WHO rankings.
Oh, you were being serious? Based on what outcome? Most expensive, yes… by far. Otherwise not.
We spend nearly double what other advanced nations spend and our rate of healthcare inflation was on a trajectory to bankrupt the nation. Note I said “was”. That rate of inflation has slowed since 2010. With time we are projected to spend fewer of our dollars proportionally on healthcare and also spend fewer tax dollars on healthcare.
Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Israel, Japan, Luxembourg, Norway, Sweden… well you get the idea, all have better healthcare outcomes than the US and spend about half of what we do per capita! In the US we spend almost $1 trillion a year unnecessarily on healthcare!! Money you could spend on other things goes to further enrich doctors, lawyers, drug and hospital execs, shareholders and venture capitalists.
Jeff,
What is wrong with “enriching” doctors? Again you have no idea of what you are talking about. Doctors are only a small percentage to the overall health care dollar. The majority goes to hospitals. The reason that your expenses are so high is that Medicare and Medicaid don’t pay their way and thus the charge goes to private pay. Our system is disarranged because the government has gotten into it. Get the government out and our health care expenses will go down, significantly. Are you aware that about 30% of the health care dollar goes to administration to make sure that everyone is compliant with Washington’s demands. As to quality, we had the best in the world. Now you will find out what bad quality is.
The WHO rankings are pure propaganda Jeffery and anyone who looks at the criteria objectively can see that.
For example, countries are given points for having socialized medicine. That is an obvious bias, but people like you don’t care about that type of thing.
You mean it goes to the people that do work and actually produce?
Gee, what a horrible thought that is.
Hasn’t Jeffe told us a few times that he makes oodles of cash? Weird how he’s OK with his own obscene profit, eh?
J- “Insuring that every American has access to quality healthcare.” Well, the post was about health insurance, not healthcare, but whatever. The latest CBO estimate I’ve seen is that they expect 26-30 million still uninsured by 2019. And by the “every American” quote I take it that you don’t mean to include illegal immigrants. You actually said one thing right.
Piratee,
Yep, and that’s how I know that the system is raping the working classes and transferring wealth upward to the already rich. You guys support a system that makes guys like me rich at the expense of yourselves and the other citizens. As I’ve said before, thanks, but let’s work together to fix the system. I’ll be OK either way.
I know I won’t get an answer to this because Jeffery can’t seem define his “terms”, but what does “quality healthcare” mean? And who gets to make that definition? Or is it some vague libtard term like “environmental justice”?
In other words, Jeffery is a hypocrite.
That isn’t a news flash, but it does show the type of person he is.
If you haven’t figured it out yet, Jeff is either a child, college level or less or is mentally disturbed. He certainly does not have any significant education.
jl,
You know that health insurance and healthcare are synonymous in the advanced world.
The rest of you rapidly revert to name-calling when challenged.
You use any means necessary to divert attention from your paucity of ideas and reasoning.
Ummm…..no….. no one knows that at all.
Once again we see where you have to make up and define terms outside the norm to try to make your point.
Challenged by whom or what? You?
Thanks for the laugh.
When jl asked you a simply question, you cannot answer it so don’t go talking about being challenged unless you want to talk about yourself.
gitar,
um… yes.
I am not obligated to answer the questions posed here by commenters. Asking for definitions repeatedly is a tactic used on the right to derail discussions.
What exactly do you mean by “outside the norm”? Until you answer my demand to my satisfaction I will keep asking and not address any other issue (the david approach).
What exactly do you mean by “a simply question”?
You need to define every outside the norm term you use (after first defining “outside the norm” to my satisfaction).
And about the debate tactic (the ad hominem fallacy) of calling an opponent a hypocrite: we’re all hypocrites about something.
According to the Pirate, any far-rightist conservative who uses even one cent of government support, e.g., Medicare, unemployment, Medicaid, Social Security, food stamps, interstate highways, etc is a hypocrite. I could use the fact that all conservatives are hypocrites to invalidate any argument they make but that would be disingenuous.
I’ve never taken one penny of federal direct payment in my entire life, so I’m much less of a hypocrite than almost every conservative in America. On the other hand the Pirate and his minions use that tactic to attack liberals personally rather than to attack their arguments. Climate realists should shut up since some of them drive a Prius and use at least one milliliter of gasoline, therefore a hypocrite! Liberal entrepreneurs who make a comfortable living should shut up about our broken economy because they are hypocrites!
Would you care to discuss the use of ad hominem tactics to derail an debate or just to use the tactic to end a debate and declare yourself the winner?
gitar: Have you, at any time in your life, ever used even one cent of federal money for your own use? This includes, but is not limited to: unemployment payments, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, food stamps, aid to families and children, Pell or other education grants, FHA or other loan support. Have you, at any time in your life, ever used federal facilities or services paid for by the taxes of other Americans? This includes but is not limited to: driving or riding on interstate highways, other federal highways, using a drug approved by the FDA, attending a state college or university, flown on an airplane, landed at an airport, used an imported product, ingested a USDA screened foodstuff, used the internet etc.
In fact, unless you are living entirely and completely self-sufficiently, off the grid, raising and hunting your own food, you are a hypocrite and we cannot accept any argument you make concerning economic concerns. I’m not a monster and will allow you to breathe the clean air and drink the clean water that is partly the result of the EPA without penalty.
Jeffery,
No one ever said that you were. The issue is not whether you answer a question but rather when you claim to answer a question but are actually answering something else. See jl’s question in this thread for an example of that tactic.
For someone who repeatedly claims they want to debate, you have a remarkable capacity to do the exact opposite.
Actually, we aren’t. It is not a fallacy to label something accurately which is what people have done with you.
Given that you are unwilling to debate, I am not sure of your point here.
Face it Jeffery, you are incapable of an honest discussion on anything. You can’t see or understand logic and have a definite problem with comprehension skills.
” Exactly how both of these function is explained here. It is also possible that you make withdrawal earlier than the said age but you will have to pay penalties. The coronet she is wearing is inscribed with the word “Liberty.