Posted on 09/26/2017 11:28:59 AM PDT by Wolfie
The Graham-Cassidy Scam
It appears that Graham-Cassidy, the latest "repeal and replace" load of nonsense out of the Republican Party, is doomed.
The option to pass such "one party only" supported bills expires on September 30th in the Senate. That's when the reconciliation option runs out, at which point standard rules in the Senate apply -- if there is a filibuster you need 60 votes to proceed, and obviously you won't get them without at least some people crossing the aisle.
Graham-Cassidy, in summary, would take Medicaid and turn it into a block grant -- in other words, a pile of cash to the states to allocate for health care however they wish. It does a handful of other things as well, including getting rid of the individual mandate, but the 900lb gorilla in the china shop is the block grant change.
This will do several bad things, and leaves open one potential good thing, which is why the bill is doomed.
The "bad things" include institutionalizing ridiculous health care spending on Medicaid. We currently blow crazy amounts of money on that program, and on health care generally. Turning it into a block grant simply moves the problem.
But it is in fact that moving of the problem that really scares people.
You see with block grants the money is the States' to do with pretty-much as they wish. If they can provide a much better program for indigent people for less money then they get to pocket the rest of the cash, and it's not a small amount of cash either!
This, in the end, is why it will not be passed -- it would take just one state to decide to start enforcing anti-trust law or conditioning business licenses on posted prices and non-discriminatory billing and the entire house of cards that comprises the medical scam would come crashing down instantly.
Right now the states have little or no fiscal reason to do so when it comes to these two programs. They do have a reason to do it when it comes to their pension costs, but they can (and are trying!) to evade that decision by instead screwing the pensioners.
But if you take the billions that a state gets for Medicaid, turn it into a block grant, and the state can keep whatever it doesn't need once it serves all its residents then there suddenly is a very powerful incentive to crash the cost of medical care in that state by 50-80%.
Simply conditioning business licenses and tax registrations at the state level on open, published and non-discriminatory pricing becomes an extremely powerful fiscal tool that would lead to billions of federal dollars that could be spent on whatever a state wanted once its Medicaid recipients are taken care of.
There's a non-zero chance one or more states would do exactly that -- which cannot be allowed to happen, because if it does happen with one state it will spread fast to all of them as the business incentive to locate a company in that state will become overwhelming and any state that does not go along will be economically eviscerated within just a few short years.
And that, my friends, is why this bill is doomed -- and so are you.
Your only defense is to not need "health care" at all and then to reduce your income to a level sufficient to become immune to the fines and Obamacare "forced payments" by using the maximum subsidy to buy whatever "policy" you can get for a near-zero cost. In doing so you withdraw consent from the health care scam and it's perfectly legal to do so. If you need actual care then get on a plane, bus, train or in a car and cross a border, accepting that if the option to do doesn't exist due to exigent circumstance you'll take the alternative (which might well be death) instead. What you actually wind up "buying" (for free, incidentally; this costs me about 50 cents a month to do) is a catastrophic policy in that it has a very high deductible but if you get in a nasty car wreck or have some other immediate and horrible incident you can finance the deductible and it will cover the rest, and since it costs you personally an effective zero dollars it all works out. The only trick in a non-Medicaid expansion state is that you have to "make" about $15 large to access this; if you are under that then you run "naked" with no insurance at all (since you can't get on Medicaid without under-18 children.)
I'm not making $100 large+ a year when the government demands I turn over 15% of it pre-tax so I can pay some drug addicted and/or ridiculously obese person's health care bill, then pay taxes on the rest on top of it. That's simply not going to happen since I have to work 5x as hard as I do now but have an effective tax rate of more than 50% all-in, so I wind up with less than twice as much at the end of the day but work five times as hard to achieve it. By taking this approach not only do I not pay for the worthless "insurance" I also pay a near-zero effective income tax rate as well.
In short if the government won't stop stealing and you don't have the stomach for an actual fight then **** 'em -- stop working to the extent you need to in order to not pay, fix your health through lifestyle and withdraw from their game, giving 'em all a big fat middle finger.
This person thinks Medicaid isn't institutionalized now?
Whew!
Yes, we blow big amounts of money on Medicaid now. The best way to cut that, is to provide block grants to the states, make them a stakeholder, and then place the onus on their back to reign in Medicaid spending, or subsidize Medicaid shortfalls.
This is a good way to get the states to be more judicious, not toss big numbers of people on the program at no cost to them.
States, toss all the people on it you want. You're only getting "X" dollars this year.
What we've been doing is backing states who wish to toss everyone on it. This IS better.
Graham-Cassidy is nothing more than kabuki theater for the RINO Republican'ts like Mitchie McConnell and Linda Graham to posture and pretend they are trying to do something for the people, all the while knowing nothing will come of it.
As soon as I saw Linda Graham's name associated with it, I knew it had a stench about it!
*If* they kept the same amounts but went to block grants (no state getting less than it was previously) and required any and all insurers to cover pre-existing conditions, it might have passed. Possibly not, but no Senator is going to vote for anything that means less money coming to their state, regardless of who/what/why/how.
NOTHING that does not require any and all entities to cover pre-existing conditions is going to pass. Period. It is such a matter of life and death to people who have played the game by the rules for 25-50 years in the workforce that it supersedes all else, political affiliation, specific details of any bill or program or funding. As long as denying anyone who has properly maintained coverage the ability to maintain it for roughly the same cost is on the table anything and everything is a non starter.
Just my view of the facts as they stand, a cranky .02
Your only defense is to not need “health care” at all and then to reduce your income to a level sufficient to become immune to the fines and Obamacare “forced payments” by using the maximum subsidy to buy whatever “policy” you can get for a near-zero cost.
However, it only works for me because even the bronze plan is prohibitively expensive for us 63 year old folk.
It sure is, both sides of the aisle. Nobody in DC is prepared to take profits away from their deep-pocket donors.
What could be simpler than local clinics which provide first-aid options? That make life-style suggestions, and provide health care for those who don't want expensive health care?
In short if the government won’t stop stealing and you don’t have the stomach for an actual fight then **** ‘em — stop working to the extent you need to in order to not pay, fix your health through lifestyle and withdraw from their game, giving ‘em all a big fat middle finger.
What could be simpler than local clinics which provide first-aid options?
And back in the early 90’s I used one when my daughter broke her arm. I had $10,000 deductible back then for cheap. The cost of the broken arm when all was said and done was $275.
This is where we are headed no matter what happens with Obamacare. And for those that have a healthy lifestyle, it will be enough and, frankly, the way things SHOULD be done.
That is a silly rule and needs to go away. Those clowns in the Senate need to do the people's business, which does not involve preening in front of a camera. Hopefully, when John McCain, the primary preener, passes on the Senate can have a reality moment and get rid of this rule.
It’s just way of wasting time while appearing to be doing something. An old sage once said, “Never confuse activity with achievement.”
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.