GOP ACA Replacement Imminent....Predictions

[First]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/01/us/politics/affordable-care-act-health-care-trump.html?_r=2

Most tax breaks reduce the amount owed to the government. A refundable tax credit can also result in payments from the government: If the credit exceeds a person’s tax liability, the government pays him or her the excess.

“I think refundable tax credits are just another word for subsidies,” said Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky.

Defenders of refundable tax credits say they are needed to make insurance affordable to people who pay little or no taxes.

“Otherwise, they’re useless,” said Representative Chris Collins of New York, one of Mr. Trump’s top supporters in Congress. “What good’s a tax credit for folks who don’t pay taxes?”

In fact, for those who cannot pitch in much of their own income, even a refundable tax credit is not likely to be enough to pay for a health insurance policy, Democrats say. That is one reason the Republican alternative is not likely to cover as many people as the Affordable Care Act.

These details on refundable tax credits were revealed last week sometime and has already been talked about here a little bit, but didn't see any O'care threads on first page. Latest GOP ACA replacement details can be found at Politico here.

So, predictions. Will Republicans really offer up this Obamacare-lite as replacement? Refundable tax credits, the primary way people will be able to afford private insurance, are identical to subsidies in every way except name, and perhaps timing? (tax season versus monthly payments). There's lots of bluster about repealing O'care in the next 3 weeks but no indication that the exchanges are going to be dismantled (so far) or that they'll repeal pre-existing conditions requirements (though I hear a lot of weasel words from Repubs about pre-existing conditions). The leaked draft form Politico apparently still says they're going to reduce Medicaid benefits, though by how much is up in the air due to GOP governors pushing back hard on that. I've also heard asinine stuff that'll make things worse, like repealing the mandate (which has been half-done by EO) and of course repealing the minimum benefits requirements, which'll bring premiums down....to the point where the insurance itself might actually be totally useless! The derp is strong with these guys.

Anyway, with these nutcases in Congress who knows what'll transpire, but whatever happens I bet it'll either be nothing at all (infighting) or they'll mostly keep O'care in place. Poll added.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

My prediction. FOAD.

 

[boomerang]

At this point what difference does it make? The left has convinced themselves that 0bamacare is a crown jewel when it comes to legislation. Therefore, nothing by way of replacement will be satisfactory.

 

[brycejones]

At this point what difference does it make? The left has convinced themselves that 0bamacare is a crown jewel when it comes to legislation. Therefore, nothing by way of replacement will be satisfactory.

Well that is a load of complete BS. People are pretty open to discussing replacements as long as they don't result in fewer people being covered then are covered under the ACA. Have a way to really improve on the ACA I really believe people are open to discussing it. The problem is most of the ideas floated so far don't really do anything to improve on the ACA. HSAs as an example - Are great if you have the money to put into them. But they aren't a solution that helps those on on a lower income. They are also predicated on the false idea that if you're spending "your money" you'll make different less expensive health care choices. Except there is ZERO price transparency in the health care industry. There is no way to be an "informed" consumer.

 

[thraashman]

Well that is a load of complete BS. People are pretty open to discussing replacements as long as they don't result in fewer people being covered then are covered under the ACA. Have a way to really improve on the ACA I really believe people are open to discussing it. The problem is most of the ideas floated so far don't really do anything to improve on the ACA. HSAs as an example - Are great if you have the money to put into them. But they aren't a solution that helps those on on a lower income. They are also predicated on the false idea that if you're spending "your money" you'll make different less expensive health care choices. Except there is ZERO price transparency in the health care industry. There is no way to be an "informed" consumer.

You have to remember that people like Boomerang LITERALLY get erections when they hear of poor people dying, so arguing with him on ways to keep that from happening is like revoking access to porn for a 14 year old

 

[fskimospy]

At this point what difference does it make? The left has convinced themselves that 0bamacare is a crown jewel when it comes to legislation. Therefore, nothing by way of replacement will be satisfactory.

I don't know what would be sadder, if you're lying or if you actually believe this.

Actually on second thought it's way sadder if you actually believe it. If you're just lying well...that's what people expect from you. If you actually believe it that means you're either totally delusional or you're one of the stupidest people on the planet.

 

[First]

At this point what difference does it make? The left has convinced themselves that 0bamacare is a crown jewel when it comes to legislation. Therefore, nothing by way of replacement will be satisfactory.

Indeed, this is another way of saying your ideological brethren got nothing.

 

[JSt0rm]

I hope they split and can't get anything done. Hilarious.

 

[Jaskalas]

GOP ACA Replacement Imminent....Predictions

Bootstraps....
They don't believe in insurance or caring for those who can't afford it, even though the nation / currency as a whole can soak costs. So the "solution" is pay for it yourself, via FYGM.

 

[boomerang]

Indeed, this is another way of saying your ideological brethren got nothing.

Perhaps, but I do remember when Dem's were being lambasted over and over for foisting 0bamacare on the populous that they kept saying that it was a Republican plan. Democrats were perpetually blameless. At least in their own minds. It's a coping mechanism, we get it.

You guys are so fucking confused you don't know which way is up most of the time. Thanks goodness the nation has, over the course of the last decade or so, removed so very many of you from governmental positions.

 

[agent00f]

Perhaps, but I do remember when Dem's were being lambasted over and over for foisting 0bamacare on the populous that they kept saying that it was a Republican plan. Democrats were perpetually blameless. At least in their own minds. It's a coping mechanism, we get it.

You guys are so fucking confused you don't know which way is up most of the time. Thanks goodness the nation has, over the course of the last decade or so, removed so very many of you from governmental positions.

Have you seen the inside of a school long enough to learn that it doesn't turn out well for folks who brag about being on the wrong side of history? In this case the side of history predating regulated healthcare costs.

 

[brycejones]

Perhaps, but I do remember when Dem's were being lambasted over and over for foisting 0bamacare on the populous that they kept saying that it was a Republican plan. Democrats were perpetually blameless. At least in their own minds. It's a coping mechanism, we get it.

You guys are so fucking confused you don't know which way is up most of the time. Thanks goodness the nation has, over the course of the last decade or so, removed so very many of you from governmental positions.

Well you know except for GOP lawmakers claiming several features of the ACA exist because the GOP put them there or were GOP ideas. But you have never been one to really deal in honesty here.

 

[ch33zw1z]

They're going to try and replace it with something completely different, and fuck most of the people who currently benefit from it.

 

[thraashman]

Thanks goodness the nation has, over the course of the last decade or so, removed so very many of you from governmental positions.

Because last time Republicans had complete control of the government everything was just fucking perfect, right? Oh, wait, no they collapsed the fucking economy and started 2 unfunded wars that killed thousands of Americans, hundreds of thousands of Middle Eastern/Persian people, and destabilized the region. Also, they made no fucking attempts to fix healthcare

 

[First]

Perhaps, but I do remember when Dem's were being lambasted over and over for foisting 0bamacare on the populous that they kept saying that it was a Republican plan. Democrats were perpetually blameless. At least in their own minds. It's a coping mechanism, we get it.

You guys are so fucking confused you don't know which way is up most of the time. Thanks goodness the nation has, over the course of the last decade or so, removed so very many of you from governmental positions.

It is indeed a hybrid free market plan that has some significant origins in old school liberal Republicanism, that's just part of documented history. No one is really confused about that, except you and a few other wingnuts of course. And besides, no account of history has any significant Democrat for any significant period of time blaming O'care passage on Republicans. Certainly, Republicans have done everything in their power to make it worse over time by not helping to fix legislative language, though again, that's just a well known part of the record books.

 

[interchange]

I'm not sure if they will actually repeal/replace or rather add on. But it seems inevitable that some form of tax credit and/or expanded HSA will make its way in.

A tax credit to me is less likely to happen, and guaranteed to be insufficient. It seems contrary to Republican ideas on tax structure (i.e. a tax credit that helps the poor more in % of income is equivalent to a tax hike on the rich).

I'm not opposed to an expanded HSA. I would benefit from it. I don't find it precisely creating a tax-shelter for the rich simply because it is a negligible savings for the rich. It helps most the upper middle class. I'm biased, I suppose. I'm someone who could shave a few thousand off my taxes using it, and a few thousand is meaningful to me. Unfortunately, I see reason to expect that uninsured or underinsured people would ever use this to improve their health care.

More to the point, though. Neither of these are insurance. They don't pool your risk. If you have an unexpected large medical expense, you're hosed. It's counter to the whole idea.

 

[agent00f]

It is indeed a hybrid free market plan that has some significant origins in old school liberal Republicanism, that's just part of documented history. No one is really confused about that, except you and a few other wingnuts of course. And besides, no account of history has any significant Democrat for any significant period of time blaming O'care passage on Republicans. Certainly, Republicans have done everything in their power to make it worse over time by not helping to fix legislative language, though again, that's just a well known part of the record books.

In all fairness he's probably not confused about that, just too deficient in integrity to use relevant info in the service of reason.

 

[K1052]

I am too unsure to make a concrete prediction but the caucuses in both houses don't appear to agree on hardly anything. Trying to roll Medicaid cuts via bloc grants into this attempt makes an already steep uphill climb basically an attempt to summit Everest in nothing but a windbreaker and a thong.

 

[vi edit]

They'll push for more fools gold in the way of "interstate policies" that will offer very little utility to anyone.
They'll remove the mandate which is one of the most controversial, but also the critical thing in funding risk pools with low risk premiums.
They'll remove the income based premium adjustment.
They'll add some lame voucher ($1,000 - $2,000) credit in an attempt to make it look like they are doing something to offset costs which will ultimately end up costing thousands more for low income current policy holders.

Basically the sickest of the sick, and poorest of poor will get fucked. Hospitals are going to see a huge rise in no-pays due to 15+ million uninsured seeking care without any coverage. Some younger/healthier people will just go without insurance and not get hit for the non-insured penalty. Everyone else will see higher premiums due to the mandate being repealed, and hospitals seeking to recoup no-pays charging for more.

 

[Brainonska511]

Well that is a load of complete BS. People are pretty open to discussing replacements as long as they don't result in fewer people being covered then are covered under the ACA. Have a way to really improve on the ACA I really believe people are open to discussing it. The problem is most of the ideas floated so far don't really do anything to improve on the ACA. HSAs as an example - Are great if you have the money to put into them. But they aren't a solution that helps those on on a lower income. They are also predicated on the false idea that if you're spending "your money" you'll make different less expensive health care choices. Except there is ZERO price transparency in the health care industry. There is no way to be an "informed" consumer.

They like HSAs because of the idea of having "skin-in-the-game". Which is somewhat outrageous considering one of the many complaints right now is high deductibles (aka, having skin-in-the-game) and it's not like Republicans are going to be pushing a plan where the government shoulders even more of the costs.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

At this point what difference does it make? The left has convinced themselves that 0bamacare is a crown jewel when it comes to legislation. Therefore, nothing by way of replacement will be satisfactory.

Crown jewel is single payer. I'll applaud any and all who get that done

 

[Fanatical Meat]

They like HSAs because of the idea of having "skin-in-the-game". Which is somewhat outrageous considering one of the many complaints right now is high deductibles (aka, having skin-in-the-game) and it's not like Republicans are going to be pushing a plan where the government shoulders even more of the costs.

That's what I don't like about HSA's, they encourage savings which is great but that gets eaten up by deductibles and prescription costs.

 

[ivwshane]

What ever it is, it certainly won't meet the standards the president himself has called for.

 

[Homerboy]

At this point what difference does it make? The left has convinced themselves that 0bamacare is a crown jewel when it comes to legislation. Therefore, nothing by way of replacement will be satisfactory.

Complete and utter bullshit.

 

[Homerboy]

That's what I don't like about HSA's, they encourage savings which is great but that gets eaten up by deductibles and prescription costs.

HSAs are great when you make enough money to actually save.