If my Governor doesn't allow insurance companies to offer plans that don't include essential benefits then I'll vote him out.
lol, you buy it as "freedom" because Cruz named it "the freedom option." The details of his amendment are far, far from allowing freedom--it gives the "Freedom of choice" to the state, which, as you know, will effectively eliminate that choice from actual consumers.
lol. republicans are so easily duped by simple catch phrases. Just ask an actual healthcare policy analyst to explain the Cruz amendment to you. It will make you sad.
We're talking about the poor here...they're on the Medicaid expansion.
Sea-Ray doesn't care about actual coverage or healthcare. He just wants cheap insurance (that may or may not cover anything meaningful) even if his wife is hosed in the process.
If my Governor doesn't allow insurance companies to offer plans that don't include essential benefits then I'll vote him out.
Those plans are basically useless. Can you predict if you will have cancer next year?
I'm not talking Medicaid. I'm talking about the rest of us who do pay for our insurance. Medicaid is something else
By taking away medicaid and premium subsidies. War is Peace, right?
I do want cheap, I prefer the term affordable, options for everyone. Why don't you?
The bill that contains the Cruz amendment you're enamored with guts Medicaid. So those people will be what...free to not buy with non-existent money inexpensive but useless plans?
I'll answer. I like this in theory however literally everywhere else in the world proves it will not work this way and stay affordable.
So your only answer is single payer?
The two principles are not linked. I said that I liked this principle of the Cruz Amendment. As for Medicaid, cutting its growth is a good thing. If you insist on keeping it in full, fine. Just give the rest of us who are paying our way, choices
You're channeling David Stockman now.The idea is that we can reduce the cost and thereby reduce the subsidies needed
That is the safe answer. I have yet to have anyone point to a free market(ish) healthcare system that works efficiently for anything but profits.
I'm up for reviewing some if you can find any.
No question, any free market solution can be picked apart because everyone is not guaranteed coverage. I'm not going to go into a dissertation of the free market healthcare system but I do want to acknowledge the real world in the USA today. And that is that single payer is not on the table right now. Republicans don't want it and many Dems don't either. Hillary is one of those Dems. So face the fact that it's not a possibility. With that in mind, we have to come up with the best free market solution. Obamacare ain't it IMO.
then why trash Obamacare and start all over? Why not take whats good, improve what is bad?
No question, any free market solution can be picked apart because everyone is not guaranteed coverage. I'm not going to go into a dissertation of the free market healthcare system but I do want to acknowledge the real world in the USA today. And that is that single payer is not on the table right now. Republicans don't want it and many Dems don't either. Hillary is one of those Dems. So face the fact that it's not a possibility. With that in mind, we have to come up with the best free market solution. Obamacare ain't it IMO.
The idea is that we can reduce the cost and thereby reduce the subsidies needed
Collins and Capito out with statements that they will not vote for the Motion To Proceed. Portman real unlikely also.
Down to it's last gasps.
And Trump just now:
Someone should really inform him that he and the GOP will be blamed. Congresscritters appear smart enough to understand this.
Yeah, I don't understand this argument at all. For it to fail funding needs to be cut which can be done but why would cutting funding exempt the person who cut the funding from blame?