Posted on 11/01/2009 5:56:25 PM PST by Steelfish
NOVEMBER 2, 2009
GOP Set to Propose Its Own Health Bill
By GREG HITT
WASHINGTON -- Republicans are preparing an alternative health-care bill to Democratic legislation, House Republican Leader John Boehner said, marking a shift in strategy as the full House is set to begin debate on the issue this week.
Mr. Boehner said Sunday the Republican bill would extend health-insurance coverage to "millions" of Americans but wouldn't try to match the scope of the House Democratic bill unveiled last week. The Democratic legislation, if passed, is estimated to expand coverage to more than 30 million Americans now without insurance. Its estimated gross cost is $1.055 trillion over 10 years.
"What we do is we try to make the current system work better," Mr. Boehner, of Ohio, said on CNN's "State of the Nation." He said the GOP bill would be less costly to taxpayers and involve less government intrusion into the health-care sector, instead taking "a step-by-step approach" to expanding coverage.
It would, among other things, propose new limits on medical malpractice lawsuits and make it easier for individuals and small businesses to pool resources to purchase insurance.
Mr. Boehner said the Republican bill would also include a proposal to provide grants to states that use "innovative" solutions to expand insurance. He pointed to states that have created special "high-risk pools" to provide insurance coverage to individuals with pre-existing conditions
He said the bill wouldn't raise taxes, nor mandate that individuals and businesses purchase insurance, as the Democratic legislation does.
For months, Republicans have attacked the Democratic health plan, hammering at pieces of the bill -- such as a proposed government-run health plan -- and helping to stir public doubt over the initiative.
By unveiling their own legislation, Republicans will be able to coalesce around a concrete plan.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Spine developing?
bmp
Is it 20,000 pages yet? What else is tacked onto it that has no relation to the title?
And how exactly do you plan to pay for those "grants," Boehner?
And, what's to prevent those "grants" from going to shore up otherwise failing state-level health care fascism, e.g., "Romneycare" in Massachusetts?
As far as I am concerned, this is more tomfoolery from the Stupid Party establishment. They have seen what is going on in NY's 23rd District, and they are running scared for their own political lives.
If Rep. Bonehead really wanted to be "innovative," he would get the Feds out of health care entirely!
DON'T TREAD ON ME!
Maybe they can get Dede and Newt to sell it for ‘em.
Sort of late isn’t it?
The best thing to do is nothing.
Anything the government does is a total screw up so if the Republicans offer nothing we’d be significantly better off, no one would have to post anything on-line to read, it would save paper, save tax payers money, we’d get to keep our own insurance and keep our own doctors.
Doing nothing makes sense...
Add in some tort reform at the Stat level and what the competition drive down the prices.
It sounds good, but one has to ask why such a bill was not wheeled out months ago when all of this started.
If Rep. Bonehead really wanted to be “innovative,” he would get the Feds out of health care entirely!
&&
Exactly
There are already healthcare bills done from our side... what’s wrong with those?
Is there going to come a point in time where the Republicans will realize that we do not want their brand of Health Care or the Democrats? We just want them to get the heck out of our way and let us solve these problems in the private sector. Just remove the barriers.
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."The 10th Amendment to the United States Constitution
Read this (scroll down on the constitution re: regulation):
Note the title... evidenced by reactions on this thread.
We have five bills here at the site being read over... as well as teams on the Deathcare bill.
Sure, that's what we'd prefer. But it's not gonna happen -- not with this Congress, nor this administration.
Boehner's proposal is strictly pro forma. Now, when the left shrieks and the independents ask, the GOP House "had a plan".
And, God knows, it's a better one than Pelosi's...
He is quite the idiot. What about allowing purchase of health insurance across statelines? How bout expanding the use of medical savings accounts and catastrophic health insurance (which is banned in NY)? How bout upping co-pays and decreasing premiums?
It's not gonna happen cause Boehner and the RINO Party establishment are too scared to stand up for real freedom for once! Instead, they will either stand aside and stay quiet as those who aren't scared are pilloried...or join in the beat down themselves!
do nothing, say nothing —> be nothing
...............................
look at the number of Republicans in the
current Congress
Really, what difference does it make? Anything the GOP proposes is DOA. Like I said, this is pro forma, nothing more.
Under the circumstances, you can't hold Boehner and the GOP responsible for any healthcare plan -- other than voting unanimously to defeat Pelosi's.
Let’s see what really pops out of this.
By making 20 million of them buy it.
Tort reform. This is what I want to hear.
EXCEPT we already have Medicare and Medicaid and countless regulations that are driving up health care costs.
Malpractice reform and HSAs make sense; also more choices in insurance options; like Senator Kyl said, not everyone needs maternity care in their policy.
So what are you doing besides ranting on this forum? Are you working to get candidates elected?
Maybe you should run for office, and fix the country with one fell swoop.
There’s no doubt there are ways to improve healthcare including tort reformand interstate healthcare choices to improve competition along with chosing what you want in your policy much like auto insurance but what we’ve got is liberals in charge so none of the above will happen anytime soon.
Medicare & Medicaid we’re stuck with for many years much like Social Security... all three are costing billions but it’s a mindset that’s been around far to long. I’m 54 and would give everything I put in to date if I could keep my own money and do what I want with it from here out.
We’ll see what the repubs have to offer but I expect it’s dead on arrival already for the next few years anyway.
There would have to be a regulatory framework to define when various conditions will be deemed to originate. Most likely insurers would require customers to purchase insurance well in advance of its effective date in order to get the best rates; customers who want insurance to become effective quickly would have to submit to extensive medical testing and/or pay much higher premiums. (The basic idea here would be that if someone buys a cancer policy that will be effective a year after purchase, and such a person doesn't have obvious cancer when the policy goes into effect, it's unlikely that the person would have been hiding any pre-cancerous symptoms when the policy was purchased).
A system of real insurance would allow purchasers to decide what types of treatment they would demand, and what types they'd be willing to forgo. For example, if an insurer offered two cancer policies for women, one of which would provide for reconstructive surgery following a mastectomy and the other of which would not, women would be free to choose whether they'd rather pay the higher premium of the former plan, or accept the risk that if they got cancer their insurance wouldn't cover reconstructive surgery. Some women would value their image enough that they'd rather pay the higher premium; other women would rather save the money.
I'm not sure what's supposed to really be accomplished by letting employers "pool" their risks if insurance companies are supposed to pay for conditions that have already manifest themselves before the policies were purchased. Such plans are not really insurance, but rather "cost-sharing", with all the market distortions implied thereby. If "insurance" isn't really insurance, there's no real way for people to choose what level of treatment they'll want their insurance to cover for conditions that haven't yet manifested themselves.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.