Why hasn't the GOP repealed Obamacare and where is their alternative Health plan?

[Jhhnn]

Trump is still trying to get his cabinet confirmed. As for ACA repeal/replace, anyone with common sense knew it'd be complicated. No surprises here.

Anyone with common sense knew shutting down Gitmo would be complicated.

Anybody with common sense realizes that Repub leaders are ideologically opposed to the kind of tax & redistribution efforts that have extended healthcare coverage to the 20M Americans under the ACA. That ideology extends to education & other aspects of the public good as well.

It's all about greed at the top, about people who don't need more more money or more power getting more of both. When they get done tinkering with healthcare, education, financial regulation & the rest it will be at the expense of the 99%.

Despite the tsunami of bullshit it's obvious that Trump believes in the same things if we look at what he's done his whole life rather than what he said recently.

 

[emperus]

To hard core left wing partisans, it's not about the 33 days. They'd like nothing better than to pressure Republicans into a big mistake. This is nothing but internet fodder. I'd be more impressed if these folks complaining were saying something like "my insurance sucks since Obamacare. Why can't Trump give me my old plan?" But that's not what we're hearing. This is political BS. With all the things Trump is giving his detractors, this is worth 6 pages? C'mon.

Again, Republicans voted to repeal Obamacare many times while Obama was in office. Simple question. If they voted to repeal it then, why haven't they voted to repeal it now seeing they control both the Congress and White house? 2nd part, when they voted to repeal it did they have another plan to put in place? If so, why haven't we seen it seeing they control both houses and the Presidency? If not, what were they planning to once it was repealed?

2 simple questions. Please answer them without mentioning what Obama did or didn't do vis a vis Gitmo etc..

 

[Sea Ray]

Obama lying about closing Gitmo makes Trumps potential lie right?
Again why did Trump say he has a plan that will make everything better and he'll do it immediately.
Again maybe more work is happening than appears if so I'll apologize.

It doesn't make it right. Gitmo is just an example of things said during the campaign that in actuality is more difficult to accomplish legislatively. That principle is nothing new.

There's plenty of evidence that work is being done on this. Just look at Rand Paul and his group. Trump's HHS director is probably still setting up his desk

 

[Sea Ray]

Anybody with common sense realizes that Repub leaders are ideologically opposed to the kind of tax & redistribution efforts that have extended healthcare coverage to the 20M Americans under the ACA. That ideology extends to education & other aspects of the public good as well.

It's all about greed at the top, about people who don't need more more money or more power getting more of both. When they get done tinkering with healthcare, education, financial regulation & the rest it will be at the expense of the 99%.

Despite the tsunami of bullshit it's obvious that Trump believes in the same things if we look at what he's done his whole life rather than what he said recently.

I agree with you that Republicans are against the principles of income redistribution. They're about controlling the cost of healthcare and you're interested in getting free handouts. That is a big philosophical difference

 

[Sea Ray]

Again, Republicans voted to repeal Obamacare many times while Obama was in office. Simple question. If they voted to repeal it then, why haven't they voted to repeal it now seeing they control both the Congress and White house? 2nd part, when they voted to repeal it did they have another plan to put in place? If so, why haven't we seen it seeing they control both houses and the Presidency? If not, what were they planning to once it was repealed?

2 simple questions. Please answer them without mentioning what Obama did or didn't do vis a vis Gitmo etc..

Answer to question #2 is simple: Because they knew Obama would never sign a repeal.

Answer to #1 is that the replacement is complicated and getting support for one plan is difficult, like a lot of things in life are.

 

[K1052]

I agree with you that Republicans are against the principles of income redistribution. They're about controlling the cost of healthcare and you're interested in getting free handouts. That is a big philosophical difference

No, Republicans are about reducing government spending on healthcare. They give no shits about the actual costs. If you can't afford coverage under their regime then that's your fault for not being richer.

 

[SMOGZINN]

Trump is still trying to get his cabinet confirmed. As for ACA repeal/replace, anyone with common sense knew it'd be complicated. No surprises here.

Of course it is complicated, but they have had 8 years to work on it. All that they have managed in 8 years is a skeleton of a plan with only 3 bulletin points that even they knew on presenting it would not work and that they would not be able to get passed even in their own party. The Republican party can not even agree to remove the ACA which they claim is destroying health care.

 

[HomerJS]

Answer to question #2 is simple: Because they knew Obama would never sign a repeal.

Answer to #1 is that the replacement is complicated and getting support for one plan is difficult, like a lot of things in life are.

Question to your answer of #1. I've yet to get a response to this, during 6 years of repeal votes why didn't they work on replace? If its complicated as you say 6 years would have been more then enough time to have replacement ready.

 

[emperus]

Answer to question #2 is simple: Because they knew Obama would never sign a repeal.

Answer to #1 is that the replacement is complicated and getting support for one plan is difficult, like a lot of things in life are.

Getting beyond the point that they grandstanded and lied for 6 years and you seem perfectly comfortable with it. They basically said something is horrible and voted to replace it yet didn't have an alternative plan that would be better... lol

 

[Sea Ray]

No, Republicans are about reducing government spending on healthcare. They give no shits about the actual costs. If you can't afford coverage under their regime then that's your fault for not being richer.

More competition = lower costs. Thanks to Obamacare, I have only once choice. Anthem can charge me whatever. That doesn't lead to lower costs

Insurance covering fewer things=lower cost

If I buy a plan that doesn't cover exams, alcoholism, mammograms, colonoscopies and birth control free and clear of deductibles then it stands to reason that my premium will be lower

Right now all preventative is covered 100%. My teenage daughter's annual visit cost $600. Six hundred bucks for a 30 min appointment.

Here's the breakdown:

$220 for the office visit
$200 for two vaccinations (flu and meningitis)
$60 for counseling

and here's the real kicker:

$120 to "administer" the shots

So they get to charge over a hundred bucks just to give you two shots in the arm. Now if there was a co-pay of say 20% people would look at their bills and bitch about it. But as it is, insurance pays it all and the pediatrician's office knows it.

 

[Sea Ray]

Getting beyond the point that they grandstanded and lied for 6 years and you seem perfectly comfortable with it. They basically said something is horrible and voted to replace it yet didn't have an alternative plan that would be better... lol

They voted to repeal it "now" and replace it later.

 

[Sea Ray]

Question to your answer of #1. I've yet to get a response to this, during 6 years of repeal votes why didn't they work on replace? If its complicated as you say 6 years would have been more then enough time to have replacement ready.

They never got any indication that Obama would agree to a repeal. Why put all that work and political capital into something that would go nowhere. Furthermore it'd give the other side political points on which to hammer you. Their strategy was to gain power first, then institute a change. That strategy worked. They got power now

 

[Londo_Jowo]

The doctor's office is ripping off the insurance company. I paid $106 to see my rheumatologist, they do not accept the insurance I have now so this was the full uninsured price for the visit.

 

[HomerJS]

They never got any indication that Obama would agree to a repeal. Why put all that work and political capital into something that would go nowhere. Furthermore it'd give the other side political points on which to hammer you. Their strategy was to gain power first, then institute a change. That strategy worked. They got power now

Well if that's the case why waste time with 60 repeal votes? Sham for voters?

Answer to your question is constitution says Obama would be out in 2017. It would have been ready by now.

 

[K1052]

More competition = lower costs. Thanks to Obamacare, I have only once choice. Anthem can charge me whatever. That doesn't lead to lower costs

Insurance covering fewer things=lower cost

If I buy a plan that doesn't cover exams, alcoholism, mammograms, colonoscopies and birth control free and clear of deductibles then it stands to reason that my premium will be lower

Right now all preventative is covered 100%. My teenage daughter's annual visit cost $600. Six hundred bucks for a 30 min appointment.

Here's the breakdown:

$220 for the office visit
$200 for two vaccinations (flu and meningitis)
$60 for counseling

and here's the real kicker:

$120 to "administer" the shots

So they get to charge over a hundred bucks just to give you two shots in the arm. Now if there was a co-pay of say 20% people would look at their bills and bitch about it. But as it is, insurance pays it all and the pediatrician's office knows it.

It didn't lead to lower costs before the ACA and it won't if it's repealed.

Your idea to increase co-pays will effectively ration healthcare for low income people since they often don't have the money to spare. Kind of like the plot to focus on HSAs now which assumes lots of people have extra money to dump into them.

 

[Sea Ray]

Well if that's the case why waste time with 60 repeal votes? Sham for voters?

Answer to your question is constitution says Obama would be out in 2017. It would have been ready by now.

I agree with you that 60x or whatever the number is was excessive and unnecessary. No argument there

 

[Sea Ray]

It didn't lead to lower costs before the ACA and it won't if it's repealed.

Your idea to increase co-pays will effectively ration healthcare for low income people since they often don't have the money to spare. Kind of like the plot to focus on HSAs now which assumes lots of people have extra money to dump into them.

Understand, there's a limit to even what folks in decent income brackets can pay. My insurance went from $495 with a $1K deductible to $1450 with a $13K deductible since ACA was passed. That shit's gotta stop. Those kinds of increases cannot continue to go on. I get that you want more and more redistribution of wealth but there's only so much wealth you can redistribute

 

[IronWing]

More competition = lower costs. Thanks to Obamacare, I have only once choice. Anthem can charge me whatever. That doesn't lead to lower costs

Insurance covering fewer things=lower cost

If I buy a plan that doesn't cover exams, alcoholism, mammograms, colonoscopies and birth control free and clear of deductibles then it stands to reason that my premium will be lower

Right now all preventative is covered 100%. My teenage daughter's annual visit cost $600. Six hundred bucks for a 30 min appointment.

Here's the breakdown:

$220 for the office visit
$200 for two vaccinations (flu and meningitis)
$60 for counseling

and here's the real kicker:

$120 to "administer" the shots

So they get to charge over a hundred bucks just to give you two shots in the arm. Now if there was a co-pay of say 20% people would look at their bills and bitch about it. But as it is, insurance pays it all and the pediatrician's office knows it.

Is this the initial bill or the agreed pricing the insurance company actually pays? With my insurance plan, I get to see what providers bill and what the agreed pricing is. It goes something like this:

Office visit: $250
Agreed pricing: $90

Lab tests: $800
Agreed pricing: $26
(no exaggeration here, the lab pulls numbers out of their butts for full fare prices)

Dental cleaning: $300
Agreed pricing: $50

This makes discussing healthcare costs difficult. Add that many employees don't have a clue how much their employer contributes to their premiums and discussing costs becomes all but impossible.

When healthcare providers complain that Medicare reimbursements are low, are they comparing them the full fare prices or to what other insurers are willing to pay?

This type of pricing shenanigans also ties into medical bankruptcy discussions. Did the patient go bankrupt because he/she was charged an amount no insurer would ever have to pay? Did the patient make payments that actually surpassed the agreed pricing an insurer would have paid before going bankrupt? In other words, was the provider made whole by any measure but the bogus fee levels they pulled out of their butts?

 

[fskimospy]

Is this the initial bill or the agreed pricing the insurance company actually pays? With my insurance plan, I get to see what providers bill and what the agreed pricing is. It goes something like this:

Office visit: $250
Agreed pricing: $90

Lab tests: $800
Agreed pricing: $26
(no exaggeration here, the lab pulls numbers out of their butts for full fare prices)

Dental cleaning: $300
Agreed pricing: $50

This makes discussing healthcare costs difficult. Add that many employees don't have a clue how much their employer contributes to their premiums and discussing costs becomes all but impossible.

When healthcare providers complain that Medicare reimbursements are low, are they comparing them the full fare prices or to what other insurers are willing to pay?

This type of pricing shenanigans also ties into medical bankruptcy discussions. Did the patient go bankrupt because he/she was charged an amount no insurer would ever have to pay? Did the patient make payments that actually surpassed the agreed pricing an insurer would have paid before going bankrupt? In other words, was the provider made whole by any measure but the bogus fee levels they pulled out of their butts?

One thing to note is that basically no one has to pay the advertised price for medical services. The rule of thumb for medical bills if you don't have insurance is 'never pay the bill you're given'. You might not pay as little as the insurance company but you'll pay a fraction of the lost price.

 

[emperus]

They voted to repeal it "now" and replace it later.

So in the time between repealing and replacing it what do you think would happen to the health care market?

 

[K1052]

Understand, there's a limit to even what folks in decent income brackets can pay. My insurance went from $495 with a $1K deductible to $1450 with a $13K deductible since ACA was passed. That shit's gotta stop. Those kinds of increases cannot continue to go on. I get that you want more and more redistribution of wealth but there's only so much wealth you can redistribute

There are chunks of people the ACA has negatively affected from a premium perspective. I'm for fixing those issues rather than throwing the whole thing out and the 20M people who got coverage with it. I'm still waiting on the GOP plan for better yet cheaper than ACA healthcare that doesn't entirely give poor people the shaft.

 

[DrunkenSano]

Before any viable healthcare plan can be created with any chance of success, the idiotic and fraudulent way that doctors, hospitals, etc. can charge people need to be put in check. There needs to be a lockdown on how much someone can be charged for medical care, hospital stays, medicine, etc. Before that is in place, there is no way healthcare cost will be under control and competitive.

 

[Sea Ray]

Is this the initial bill or the agreed pricing the insurance company actually pays? With my insurance plan, I get to see what providers bill and what the agreed pricing is. It goes something like this:

Office visit: $250
Agreed pricing: $90

Lab tests: $800
Agreed pricing: $26
(no exaggeration here, the lab pulls numbers out of their butts for full fare prices)

Dental cleaning: $300
Agreed pricing: $50

This makes discussing healthcare costs difficult. Add that many employees don't have a clue how much their employer contributes to their premiums and discussing costs becomes all but impossible.

When healthcare providers complain that Medicare reimbursements are low, are they comparing them the full fare prices or to what other insurers are willing to pay?

This type of pricing shenanigans also ties into medical bankruptcy discussions. Did the patient go bankrupt because he/she was charged an amount no insurer would ever have to pay? Did the patient make payments that actually surpassed the agreed pricing an insurer would have paid before going bankrupt? In other words, was the provider made whole by any measure but the bogus fee levels they pulled out of their butts?

You ask a great question. Yes, I have a PPO and indeed this is the price Anthem agreed to pay. I kid you not. I about fell on the floor. It's incredible

 

[Sea Ray]

One thing to note is that basically no one has to pay the advertised price for medical services. The rule of thumb for medical bills if you don't have insurance is 'never pay the bill you're given'. You might not pay as little as the insurance company but you'll pay a fraction of the lost price.

Certainly you're not suggesting that any of us go without insurance...If you're w/o insurance you're pretty much screwed

 

[fskimospy]

Certainly you're not suggesting that any of us go without insurance...If you're w/o insurance you're pretty much screwed

Absolutely not, I'm simply saying that if someone finds themselves in that bad circumstance they have a way to mitigate the damage. You'll still lose your shirt, but you might keep your pants.