GOP ACA Replacement Imminent....Predictions

[ivwshane]

Hey, if we look at the bright side or silver lining, if implemented as is, it would be hard to imagine how Americans wouldn't be begging for single payer/universal health care.

Then again, after two terms of Bush Jr and electing what's sure to be the worst president in history (not hyperbole), my faith in the American people supporting the smart move is close to non existent.

 

[Mai72]

I noticed that they took out the mandate to have insurance.

 

[Jhhnn]

I noticed that they took out the mandate to have insurance.

Of course. You can't demand people buy something they can't afford. And Freedumb!

 

[ivwshane]

I noticed that they took out the mandate to have insurance.

They did? So there is no penalty for not having insurance? There is no penalty for not having continuous coverage? Sure sounds like a mandate to me.

 

[agent00f]

They did? So there is no penalty for not having insurance? There is no penalty for not having continuous coverage? Sure sounds like a mandate to me.

Losing contiguous coverage will likely be a lot more expensive than the weak "gubmint mandate" tax, but comparing numbers is beyond minds that work on the level of word association. gubmint = bad, mandate = bad, tax = bad; that's 3 bads. Though in hindsight maybe they can compare numbers, eg 3 bad > 1 bad.

 

[vi edit]

I've done a bit more reading on the plan. Their alternative to the mandate is just moronic. Instead of pushing people to plans it pushes them away. It's worse than a mandate. It's worse than nothing at all. The young and relatively heavy are just going to sit on the fence and not pay into the risk pools. Then buy in at a slightly higher rate when they really need it. That's not how insurance works.

 

[vi edit]

And the penalty isn't a tax. It's paid to insurance companies instead of the government.

 

[Franz316]

Wow, 7 years and they come up with this? Let's see people try and rationalize this one.. I'm sure it will happen.

 

[ch33zw1z]

So much for trumps promise

 

[ivwshane]

And the penalty isn't a tax. It's paid to insurance companies instead of the government.

Oooh goodie! So instead of paying money to uncle Sam they'll be required to pay money to private institutions! That's not a tax at all! I think they call it an alternative tax.

 

[Jhhnn]

They did? So there is no penalty for not having insurance? There is no penalty for not having continuous coverage? Sure sounds like a mandate to me.

It def raises the bar for people who haven't had insurance. In order to sign up, they have to pay yuge front loaded premiums, thus putting coverage out of reach for many. Killing the employer mandate just adds to the misery.

 

[First]

Nobody could have predicted this. Absolutely nobody.

 

[agent00f]

I've done a bit more reading on the plan. Their alternative to the mandate is just moronic. Instead of pushing people to plans it pushes them away. It's worse than a mandate. It's worse than nothing at all. The young and relatively heavy are just going to sit on the fence and not pay into the risk pools. Then buy in at a slightly higher rate when they really need it. That's not how insurance works.

It'll likely be more than "slightly higher" if auto insurance is indicative, esp when there's every reason for sick people to insure again.

 

[Paratus]

From what I've read elsewhere full coverage plans for women (i.e. those that cover abortion), will not receive tax credits.

There's no similar penalty for men's plans. So effectively women who choose full coverage plans will be subsidizing men's coverage.

 

[ch33zw1z]

But men need their ED meds

 

[fskimospy]

It'll likely be more than "slightly higher" if auto insurance is indicative, esp when there's every reason for sick people to insure again.

Yes, it will be much higher when people buy in and that's exactly how you get a death spiral. If someone is smart they will simply not buy insurance unless they get a major illness, at which point even the elevated premiums will be a bargain.

This bill isn't just 'worse', it's incompetent. The only thing it seems to accomplish is to cut taxes on rich people at the cost of destroying the individual health insurance market. This is probably why they are trying to rush it through as fast as possible as the CBO score this bill is going to get will probably be a horror show.

It's ironic that when Republicans claimed the ACA was rushed through and passed without transparency those were easily disproven lies, yet that's exactly what they are trying to do with its replacement.

 

[Balt]

But men need their ED meds

Well, duh. All the stuff the govt is putting in the water to turn men and frogs gay is causing severe ED issues for people like me and Alex Jones.

 

[Paratus]

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slat...ccupied_with_lottery_winners_on_medicaid.html



6 of the 60 pages of the new bill deal with how states handle health care for lottery winners.

If that seems absurd, just know that the word “lottery” was mentioned 11 times in the GOP health care plan. The important issue of Medicaid got equal attention with 11 mentions. A full six pages of the 60-plus page bill were devoted to lottery winnings. Lottery winnings! Essentially, the GOP bill's big idea on this—to which it devoted nearly 10-percent of its attention—is figuring out ways to make sure lottery-winners on Medicaid can't cheat the system. Seriously. The bill goes on and on and on to stipulate under which circumstances the state can declare you no longer in need of—nor entitled to—Medicaid.

 

[vi edit]

From what I've read elsewhere full coverage plans for women (i.e. those that cover abortion), will not receive tax credits.

There's no similar penalty for men's plans. So effectively women who choose full coverage plans will be subsidizing men's coverage.

So defund planned parenthood, take away access to affordable and responsible birth control and then punish them for being biologically born with the ability to birth children. BRILLIANT!

How any woman continues to vote for a party that hates them so much...good grief.

 

[Commodus]

Jason Chaffetz seriously suggested that people would have to choose between a new iPhone and health care.

That's this administration's equivalent to Romney's "47%" remark. This is how the Republicans lose 2018, 2020 and possibly beyond. It reflects the sheer contempt for lower-income families, for ethics, for the basic realities of how health care works in the US. Hint: many people spend more than the cost of an iPhone per month on their health care.

If Chaffetz was crying at his treatment in his last town hall... well, he'd better just hide in his office for the next two-plus years, because everyone will want his hide from now on.

 

[vi edit]

Jason Chaffetz seriously suggested that people would have to choose between a new iPhone and health care.

That's this administration's equivalent to Romney's "47%" remark. This is how the Republicans lose 2018, 2020 and possibly beyond. It reflects the sheer contempt for lower-income families, for ethics, for the basic realities of how health care works in the US. Hint: many people spend more than the cost of an iPhone per month on their health care.

If Chaffetz was crying at his treatment in his last town hall... well, he'd better just hide in his office for the next two-plus years, because everyone will want his hide from now on.

I seriously thought that would be the case for 2016. Yet here we are. A GOP dominated government. Large and small.

 

[sactoking]

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slat...ccupied_with_lottery_winners_on_medicaid.html



6 of the 60 pages of the new bill deal with how states handle health care for lottery winners.

It used to be that Medicaid eligibility was means tested, meaning that not only were certain groups de facto excluded (childless males,etc.) but you also could not have assets above a certain threshold. Not only did the ACA expand the eligibility of certain groups it changed eligibility to be based solely on income.

Yes, that meant that someone who won the lottery and then lived off of the winnings would fall below the eligibility threshold and become eligible for Medicaid. Looks like this new proposal reinstates some form of means testing.

 

[agent00f]

So defund planned parenthood, take away access to affordable and responsible birth control and then punish them for being biologically born with the ability to birth children. BRILLIANT!

How any woman continues to vote for a party that hates them so much...good grief.

The election proved that for conservatives, race > gender.

 

[K1052]

Trump is cautiously backing the plan on twitter deeming it open for "review and negotiation". My Trump decoder ring says this means "If the public hates it I'm going to blame congress and take no responsibility".

 

[Commodus]

Trump is cautiously backing the plan on twitter deeming it open for "review and negotiation". My Trump decoder ring says this means "If the public hates it I'm going to blame congress and take no responsibility".

I want to see what happens if Trump does the right thing and vetoes AHCA if it doesn't see major changes. Not saying he will, but if he does... watch as those investigations into Russian collusion suddenly get full cooperation from Congress.