Larry Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 17 minutes ago, gbear said: http://www.ideastream.org/news/healthcare-bill-should-preserve-coverage-american-medical-association-says Interesting to see the AMA, the AHA, and the AARP come out against the senate bill after already coming out against the House bill. So the doctors, the hospitals, and the elderly (largest group of healthcare users) are against it. Which stakeholders were consulted in setting this plan up? Somebody posted a pic/video in this thread, 4-5 days and 20-30 pages ago, along the lines of: Supporting GOPCare: 12% of the people Republican members of Congress. Opposing GOPCare: 88% of the people American Medical Association. American Heart Association American Lung Association American Cancer Society American Academy of Family Physicians. American Diabetes Association National Kidney Foundation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bliz Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 Unless my eyes are deceiving me, Ted Cruz is proposing a...compromise? Is that still a thing? https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/6/29/15890954/senate-health-care-bill-insurance-regulations-ted-cruz Quote Enter Cruz. Here’s how the Texas senator described his plan, in his own words, on Wednesday: If an insurance company offers at least one plan in the state that is compliant with the (Obamacare) mandates, that company can also sell any additional plan that consumers desire. What that does is it maintains the existing protections, but it gives consumers additional new options above and beyond of what they can purchase today. The article goes on to talk about how they're proposing trimming the Medicare cuts and increasing opiate funding. Obviously the devil is in the details, particularly the detail of exactly how much of the Medicaid reduction is being left in place, but that first part at least seems like a good idea, and maybe one of those elusive "fixes" to Obamacare everyone has been pining for, with one caveat: IMO they should have to offer plans at each tier if they also want to offer non-compliant plans. Offering only a bronze catastrophic plan, or only a platinum plan, doesn't really further the goals here. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hersh Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 21 minutes ago, Bliz said: Unless my eyes are deceiving me, Ted Cruz is proposing a...compromise? Is that still a thing? https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/6/29/15890954/senate-health-care-bill-insurance-regulations-ted-cruz The article goes on to talk about how they're proposing trimming the Medicare cuts and increasing opiate funding. Obviously the devil is in the details, particularly the detail of exactly how much of the Medicaid reduction is being left in place, but that first part at least seems like a good idea, and maybe one of those elusive "fixes" to Obamacare everyone has been pining for, with one caveat: IMO they should have to offer plans at each tier if they also want to offer non-compliant plans. Offering only a bronze catastrophic plan, or only a platinum plan, doesn't really further the goals here. It would only begin to work, the compromise part, if the Obamacare plans were priced in a competitive way. I'm guess Cruz knows that insurance companies would simply jack up the cost of the obamacare ones far beyond what they currently are and that would essentially force people into worse plans for the consumer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 8 hours ago, Bliz said: Obviously the devil is in the details, particularly the detail of exactly how much of the Medicaid reduction is being left in place, but that first part at least seems like a good idea, and maybe one of those elusive "fixes" to Obamacare everyone has been pining for, with one caveat: IMO they should have to offer plans at each tier if they also want to offer non-compliant plans. Offering only a bronze catastrophic plan, or only a platinum plan, doesn't really further the goals here. Agree with you thast it's certainly worth looking at. But my thought runs along the lines of: Let's assume that Acme offers two insurance policies; Plan A covers pre-existing conditions. Plan B does not. How many people sign up for Plan A, who don't have pre-existing conditions? And if, as we all know, nobody signs up except for people who already have pre-existing conditions, then what are their premiums like? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsPassion4Life Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 Someone needs to explain to me why insurance companies should cover pre-existing conditions? 1) We need a mandate (not government run healthcare) 2) We need as many choices/competition as possible...across state lines, etc.. 3) The government pays for the poor, elderly and people with pre-existing conditions. Let's start with these 3 things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbear Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 Skinspassion4life, the answer to your first question on why insurance companies have to cover pre-existing conditions is in point 3 below. 1) Everyone needs to be insured. On this point I agree. Those who do not have insurance are still having their care covered in hospital ER, probably the most expensive way to get treatment. If they can not or do not pay, the hospitals have to make up the costs for their treatments. Want to guess who pays then? It's the people with insurance or the state. This was more often the case prior to the ACA. What people miss when they advocate for people to be able to avoid buying health insurance is the fact they are advocating everyone else pay for their expensive care. Without insurance there is almost no way they will be able to pay. 2) While we need as many choices as possible, the choices have to cover a minimum amount of goods and services that could be needed. If one state says the insurance need not cover costs above $X (life time caps) or a grouping of expensive treatments (like giving birth for example), then all of the insurance companies will declare that state as its headquarters. At least, they will until another state allows them to cover less. It quickly becomes a race to the bottom. 3) If you pool the elderly and those with pre-existing conditions and put their care on the state's budget, you are creating a huge financial outlay. Keep in mind, the way insurance works is the expensive cases can be covered because everyone pays in and comparatively few require massive coverage. Making the state pay for the expensive cases would be another huge corporate gift, especially with a mandate for everyone to pay into the system. Suddenly everyone has to pay in for insurance, but on the most expensive cases the insurance companies get to turn them over to the state? The whole point of the mandate in the ACA was create pools of people large enough that the costs for the expensive cases is spread thin enough to be bearable by all. It is very easy to forget that any of us could become that expensive case. Our minds are poorly trained to understand rare events until they happen to us or someone we know. We all think this won't happen to us, so why do I have to pay for something from which I will never benefit. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 On 6/28/2017 at 4:51 PM, LadySkinsFan said: This, I think, is the biggest reason for keeping the insurance companies around. There will be a flood of unemployed people, raising that demographic, and where will jobs come from in other sectors? Not to mention that even my job is being taken over by tabletop kiosks. Eventually, a robot will do everything. We better be able to farm again, or we'll be pummeled by chemicals we didn't choose to have in our food. Get involved, people...I know it's time-consuming, but really important. Protest your ass off. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 Ok, guys. Repeal and Replace is dead. Let's try Repeal....and then do something later.......probably not really do anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 map of how states would be impacted by repeal https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/politics/obamacare-repeal-coverage-loss/?tid=sm_tw&utm_term=.3ac6a6b4804e#33 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD0506 Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 And instantly you see Rand Appauling jump on this, 'cuz that's where he's at, just yank the rug out and let 'em all fall on their asses. He's another asshole on a long list that need a tank parked on their chest. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Going Commando Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 3.4 million more uninsured in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan. Wonder if they still feel good about flipping Red? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 Translation: Let's just get these ****ing tax cuts going and then...whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 3 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said: 3.4 million more uninsured in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan. Wonder if they still feel good about flipping Red? I agree. Don't do anything. Let Obamacare remain as is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 Repeal without replace sounds like a dodge... and a scary one at that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 1 minute ago, Burgold said: Repeal without replace sounds like a dodge... and a scary one at that. It's BS. Just a slogan. How can they repeal it without replacing it with something? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Llevron Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 (edited) I still dont understand why they dont just work to fix whats already in place. Wouldn't that be easier and better for everyone? Edited June 30, 2017 by Llevron 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 (edited) 11 hours ago, SkinsPassion4Life said: Someone needs to explain to me why insurance companies should cover pre-existing conditions? 1) We need a mandate (not government run healthcare) 2) We need as many choices/competition as possible...across state lines, etc.. 3) The government pays for the poor, elderly and people with pre-existing conditions. Let's start with these 3 things. Look at the list they term pre-existing conditions. If you're a female, it's pretty much just existing. Pregnancy, whether normal or not is a pre-existing condition. So is any kind of hospitalization or surgery. 20 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said: It's BS. Just a slogan. How can they repeal it without replacing it with something? But they can do that if they want. It's not just a slogan. I can't believe you're that naive about this. Of course the tax cuts will survive. 4 minutes ago, Llevron said: I still dont understand why they dont just work to fix whats already in place. Wouldn't that be easier and better for everyone? But it won't be better without the tax cuts and insurance companies' profits. Edited June 30, 2017 by LadySkinsFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 If the repeal it, there has to be SOMETHING that then exists in it's place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 It will go back to the bad, old days, with the insurance companies doing whatever they want. No coverage for pre-existing conditions, no 80/20% outlay for actual services, remember? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 5 minutes ago, Llevron said: I still dont understand why they dont just work to fix whats already in place. Wouldn't that be easier and better for everyone? Because they want to tear down Obama's legacy, but more importantly pretend there was nothing important or of value to the American people. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bozo the kKklown Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 5 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said: If the repeal it, there has to be SOMETHING that then exists in it's place. You really believe this? LoL Republicans in power do not care about Americans. Stop thinking otherwise. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Llevron Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 Thats disappointing. I was hoping there was a decent reason outside of **** Obama to not just fix whats in place. I hate that they literally refuse to work together on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 2 minutes ago, Llevron said: Thats disappointing. I was hoping there was a decent reason outside of **** Obama to not just fix whats in place. I hate that they literally refuse to work together on this. They consider this a fix. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 51 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said: I agree. Don't do anything. Let Obamacare remain as is. It already isn't "as is". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 1 minute ago, @SkinsGoldPants said: It already isn't "as is". What has the GOP changed about it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now