Posted on 06/26/2017 10:41:17 AM PDT by GIdget2004
Is the federal government there to force hospitals to provide treatment to people that are uninsured and cannot pay?
I am all for the government not forcing people to buy insurance, but then it also must not force providers to provide free services.
Have you no idea how the modern American political process works?
Trump made the bad mistake of hiring per the recommendations of Jivanka—and so he has Ryan pal Priebus doing all his staffing and most of his work with Congress. The GOPe in Congress is trying to undermine Trump and get him impeached ASAP. The GOPe are also half the uniparty.
Trump needed to use the bully pulpit and hold Congress’s fat feet to the fire on this from the start and he has done neither. Instead we are now headed on a path toward socialized medicine, despite Trump and the GOPe getting elected on repealing Obamacare and replacing it with free market solutions.
He understands very well from his personal experiences the need to lower taxes and reduce regulations.
Unfortunately, apparently, he doesn’t really understand how important it is to fix our healthcare free market and deport the illegals in our country currently—two major issues he ran on and that are critical to his base, but that the liberal Democrat Jivanka of course are on the opposing side of while they quasi-run the WH.
“modified individual mandate ?
we can’t be this stupid.”
***********************************************
This thread is NOT about an individual mandate requiring someone to buy insurance.
If I tell one of my kids that they can’t go outside without first having a half hour timeout I’M NOT MANDATING THAT THEY GO OUTSIDE.
“To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries
....
“To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers”
Patents make drugs expensive - very expensive - $100,000 to $400,000 per year per patient expensive.
Insurance companies don’t want to cover people who need these expensive patented drugs because they make insurance simply too expensive for tens of millions of people.
The average American family of four will pay about $2,500 per year one way or another for our patented drug system.
Pre-existing conditions are primarily excluded simply because they (may) require expensive patented drugs. The secondary reason is prolonged mental hospitalizations.
The PPACA negated the partial counter-exclusionary rights of insurers excercised in response to the constitutionally permitted federally granted unlimited exclusionary rights of inventors (and their drug company employers/sponsors) due to the complaints of sick people who need the drugs.
The necessary condition of the “necessary and proper” supplemental power doesn’t have to be that of the federal government, it can be that of sick people needing absurdly expensive Article I, Section 8 patented drugs.
Perhaps “insurance” companies should only be required to pay no more for patented drugs for pre-existing conditions than the amount paid for premiums for the initial six or eighteen months.
Perhaps patents (or FDA approvals) for a drug should be conditioned on individual affordability for the drug.
ARBITRARY HURTFUL RULES
wait 6 months
ARBITRARY hurtful rules from fake all knowing god kings.
Rino Republicans, you are losers.
Paid bribes from global banks & corporations. The arbitrary rules create monopoly the Republicans skim off bribes.
Strictly speaking you are correct. Personally, I might allow an exception for Energencies, properly and reasonably defined/ limited. But I respect your PoV.
Alter or abolish it.
Fedbeast has overstepped its bounds and neither of these degenerate political parties is on the side of liberty or prosperity.
There are two dominant parties, and both of them are hostile to Americans.
Why? Businesses have always offered discounts for companies that buy in large volume. Those companies, in turn, reap the benefits of their buying power and pass some of the savings on to their customers. Why should insurance be any different?
“To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;....”
This is what they think the health care and insurance comes under. Same as FDR did with the New Deal. The following is an excerpt from my tagline, from a booklet written in 1939:
**************
The Constitution says that the Congress shall have the power “to regulate commerce with foreign nations, among the several states, and with the Indian tribes.” That is the famous clause. Commerce among the several states is of course interstate commerce.
Now, when the New Deal undertook to regulate wages or hours or labor conditions in the nation, it did not write a law saying that such should be the minimum national wage or such the minimum national day’s work, nor that the rules of the National Labor Relations Board should govern all employee-employer relations throughout the nation. Not at all.
It could hardly say that without first tearing up the Constitution. What it did say was that only such goods as were produced under conditions that conformed to the Federal law — only those and no other — should be permitted to move in interstate commerce.
And then the New Deal courts stretched the definition of interstate commerce to the extreme of saying that the Federal government may regulate a wheat farmer who feeds his own wheat to his own chickens, on the ground that if he had not raised his own wheat he would have had to buy wheat for his chickens and buying it would be in the way of interstate commerce; or, that the Federal government may regulate the hours and wages of elevator operators, janitors, and char-women in a Philadelphia office building because some of the building’s tenants are engaged in interstate commerce.
No! People don't sign up for it because they cannot afford it! Even WITH a subsidy...
If there is a mandate to force the uninsured to buy insurance, and it can be enforced, they why is there a problem?
The problem is that if they can’t afford the cost to buy insurance because the premiums have risen, according to ABC who has been known to protect liberals, a total of 29.7% on the average nationwide. And if they can’t afford to pay for the insurance, how is uncle sugar going to get money out of them they don’t have? You can’t bleed a turnip!
rwood
Your solution would also be MUCH cheaper. Thus that approach will be ignored.
I have no idea the health care costs from the South American illegal tsunami that breached our southern border in 2014, 2015, and 2015, but I often think how so many US citizens have suffered both prior to Obamacare and post Obamacare.
Seems we have money for everything under the sun except our own US citizens who are in need :(
Of course, the Uniparty will have their own special insurance perks that We the People will not be able to access!
But the left is deluded that coverage of "pre-existing" conditions is "insurance" and its media so brainwashed all their precious snowflakes. The proper course would be to 'damn the snowflakes, full free market ahead' but instead of Adm Farragut we're lead by Sen FearOfIt. This needs leadership by someone with Farragut's b*lls to overcome. Trump, alas, is too softhearted on the subject to use his here, but this is the single biggest reason Obamacare is jacking up premiums for everyone who's tried to do the right thing. Far more are scr*wed by it than would be scr*wed by removing it. The practical solution is Cruz's plan to ram it through the Senate as 'reconciliation' with 50 votes + Pence + Pence trumping the parliamentarian to allow it. Hillary + Kaine + Schumer would do it without blinking if needed.
They are altering it. That doesn't mean they're making it better.
There’s a third problem, which if solved will lessen the burden all around, and that’s the roughly 80% overcharging for almost everything, from medications to medical equipment, from simple procedures to bandaids. There’s just too much excess ‘fat’ being charged for everything that needs to be trimmed. Too many paper pushers, regulations, lawsuits, education debt, massive computer databases, lawyers, etc.
EVERY damn politician needs to familiarize themselves with Karl Denninger’s solutions BEFORE writing any of this fascist crap that our government shouldn’t even be involved in. Oh, wait, that’s right, none of this so called insurance will apply to Congress or their families, AND it’s not about medical care for the public, it’s about keeping that 89% excess cash cow moving so all the greedy little vermin can line their pockets.
Apparently the new, improved Uniparty GOP headed by Boehner, Ryan, and McConnel never intended to repeal Obamacare. The new bill is Obamacare lite, and some say it is worse!
We are headed straight for National Universal Health Care...
NEED TO REPEAL AND ONLY THENNN REPLACE!!
Because it’s easy and involves less control.
We are talking about people who wait until they get diagnosed with a condition and then go out and buy a policy. Then people who have paid into their insurance (and all insurance is a pool) get stuck paying higher premiums at renewal time because of people who wait until they are sick before they sign up. That’s the purpose of the 6 month waiting period
The whole problem is covering preexisting conditions. If you do that you have to include a mandate or the plan quickly collapses.
Paul had a plan to sunset the coverage for preexisting conditions, at at least taking on any new cases.
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.