Cruz Offers an Imperfect Healthcare Compromise that Just Might Work

For months now, the country has waited with interminable patience to see what the Trump Administration would do with healthcare policy. Few believed the Affordable Care Act—Obamacare—was ever a perfect solution, and Republicans spent 7 years campaigning on its immediate repeal. But even though several healthcare exchanges are collapsing and millions around the country are in danger of losing healthcare services provided by Obamacare, Republicans have had a difficult time figuring out how to go from the party of “no Obamacare” to the party of healthcare solutions.

After much wrangling, the House eventually passed a bill that was imperfect in its approach, and was essentially a punt to the Senate to come up with a better solution. It was clear the Senate’s job was to make the House plan more palatable to the voting public. Reduce costs, reduce taxes, take away the “individual mandate,” but still ensure people that want healthcare have the ability to purchase it. Up until now, those goals have been elusive.

Released today, the new Senate healthcare plan—modified by Sen. Ted Cruz—gets Republicans most of the way there, and may actually stand a chance of passage. Under the modified plan, federal Medicaid costs would be decreased at the state level, and most Obamacare taxes and penalties (many of which weren’t complied with anyway) would disappear. Gone will be the day when my butcher Roland (who is healthy) is required to pay a $700 penalty each year he doesn’t sign up for an overly-expensive government-mandated plan he can’t afford.

But, you might ask, without “penalties,” who will step in to “subsidize” the cost of high-risk patients whose plan costs are capped? The answer in the Cruz plan is finally market-driven, not government-mandated. By allowing healthy Americans the opportunity to buy cheaper, high-deductible health plans that would otherwise not qualify for Obamacare, the insurance industry essentially gets a subsidy, allowing it to decrease the cost of health plans for those that truly need coverage. And, millions of average Americans, like my friend Roland, will be able to afford catastrophic coverage that they will likely not use, but will provide peace-of-mind should tragedy strike.

Is the Senate plan perfect? Definitely not, even with the Cruz compromise. Does it contain “give-aways” to get moderate Senators on board? I don’t see how else you could categorize giving $45 billion to moderate mid-Western states to “combat the opioid epidemic.” Is it the pure “repeal” that very conservative Republicans have clamored for since 2010? It, unfortunately, is not. But what it is, is a workable—and possibly passable—alternative that fixes many of Obamacare’s worst problems, and returns power to the states, and to individuals.

Opening up the healthcare marketplace to the power of capitalism is the right way forward. More government mandates and additional taxes and regulation are not. If nothing else, the Senate’s new healthcare plan takes a step in that right direction.

The governments job is NOT healthcare or any other social program period.. welfare, food stamps, social security, medicare, medicaid and every other handout program. None of this is listed in the constitution where it states clearly what the federal governments job is.

That’s why we’re $20 trillion in debt.. idiots (government) handing out money they don’t all to get elected and that’s the ONLY reason.

Everyone wants handouts and anyone who wants preexisting conditions covered wants a hand out it’s that simple.

The liberal mindset is the result of indoctrination though lower education. There is no higher education anymore it’s brainwashing. Which is odd because folks will pay heavily to get brainwashed and have free will, thought and common sense removed but they want free healthcare.

When supposed conservatives want the handouts then they’re no better than liberals because they are liberal.

America needs to wake TFU grow a pair, work hard and earn whatever they want in life.

Those who demand handouts are the ones who are too damn lazy refuse to work and they can starve to death for all I care.

And yes there are folks that need help but that’s where family, friends, community and church come in NOT government.

I need a beer.... (that I worked for and bought on my own)

Reduce costs, reduce taxes, take away the “individual mandate,” but still ensure people that want healthcare have the ability to purchase it

The whole problem, succinctly stated, in one clever, incoherent sentence.

The reason the Republicans can't crack this nut, in fact, the reason their party won't exist as a single party by 2024, is that they are divided and unable to be reconciled over the contradiction so ably stated above.

"Ensure people that want healthcare have the ability to purchase it"

Let's break it down.

Nobody "wants" "healthcare" (whatever that is). I suppose the author of the sentence means "health insurance".

People either need health care (meaning, hospitalization, surgery, medications, and nursing services), or they don't. WHEN they need it, they want it (or are too sick to know they do), but when they don't need it, they most certainly don't WANT it.

When people NEED hospitalization, surgery, medications, and nursing services (and notice how much people don't want to think about that - they invented the euphemism "healthcare" to describe it) - when they need it, "having the ability to purchase it" is absolutely, totally, 100% completely the last thing on their minds. So is organizing society so that it will be available. What is on patient's minds at the point of need is death, or life - disability and disfigurement, or recovery. They do not know, or care, who pays, or how.

So, the Democrats have resolved the philosophical question that comes before the practical problem. They want to ensure that "healthcare" (by which they mean services) is given to all by the government without regard for ability to purchase (pay for) it. Whether this is right or wrong, smart or stupid, practical or akin to skittles from unicorns is not my point. My point is that they have resolved the contradiction embedded in "lower costs, lower taxes, no mandate, ensure ability to purchase (pay for it) for 100% of the population". The Democrats know what they want, and they are united and determined to have it.

The poor, stupid Republicans, OTOH, are divided about the underlying premise. They really do want health insurance to be cheaper without the lost revenue being made up by taxes, and they want no requirement to have it, BUT they also want "people that want healthcare" (again, whatever that means) to "have the ability to purchase it".

This is incoherent. If hospitals, surgeons, drug manufacturers and nurses do not get paid for their services, they will no longer be available. Many, many people who NEED (and therefore "want") those services cannot pay 1% of what they cost.

"Ensuring that people that want healthcare have the ability to purchase it" either means cheap insurance that doesn't cover anything OR nationalization of the resources to deliver care to those who cannot, or will not, pay.

There is no middle ground. The Democrats know what they want. The Republicans don't.

As Sun Tzu said, "It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle."

The Republicans do not have a plan because they do not have a philosophy that can support their opposed goals of more freedom for the well and perfect security for the sick.

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.