Posted on 03/03/2016 7:01:49 AM PST by Sean_Anthony
A lot more than just getting rid of the lines
I mentioned on Facebook yesterday that I am not that big a fan of election years, and here’s a case in point. At this moment, #NeverTrump is all the rage among conservatives, and there’s a tremendous push to get Republican primary voters united against one remaining Trump rival to take the nomination away from him.
My job is to write what I think about whatever happens on a given day. It’s not to only write what I think will result in a certain outcome. So when I tell you that Donald Trump’s new seven-point health care reform plan is excellent, some of you are going to say: Don’t say that now! It’ll help Trump! #NeverTrump!!!
But my job is not to care one way or the other about who it will help or hurt. It’s to say what I honestly think. And what I honestly think is that the plan Trump released yesterday is as good as I’ve heard from anyone in the race - if not necessarily better - for how to replace ObamaCare. I’m going to excerpt the seven points entirely from Trump’s web site:
You're assuming it's a zero sum situation. In fact, research money REDUCES health care costs. If we didn't do health care research, you would still have to go to the barber shop to get bled to treat pneumonia.
Not that excellent. While I'm glad he's finally put something to paper, it isn't hard to spot the flaws in it:
Section 1. So he completely eliminates Obamacare. Good start. But also I see that coverage for pre-existing conditions as well as coverage for adult children are not in his plan. These were two parts of Obamacare that were very popular and that's not going to make people happy. Also having a plan without a requirement to have healthcare insurance will tend to drive up prices. So it won't make it easier for people to afford.
Section 2. Will this actually create competition and drive prices down? If an insurance company does not do business in my state then it has no established network and would pay a much higher price for medical services they bill for. If they have no network in my state then I would pay a higher deductible, a higher copay and have to pay a higher percentage of the bill. So with higher costs for me and the insurance company then where is the benefit to me in buy their policy and where is the benefit to them in selling to me?
Sections 3 and 6 are contradictory. In three Trump want to expand Medicaid to cover more low-income people, something Obamacare tried and which about half the states refused to participate in. How would Trump change that. In six Trump wants to block-grant Medicaid money so that states could, theoretically, reduce coverage and use the funds elsewhere if they want to. I don't see where this helps with coverage.
Section 4 is puzzling. Health Savings Accounts already exist, they are tax deductible, and they can be set up either through an employer or by individuals. People need the money to contribute but the plan is already in place.
Section 5 is also available. The government publishes prices that are charged by hospitals for dozens of procedures so people could price-shop if they wanted. But healthcare isn't buying a new car. People go to the nearest hospital in the event of an emergency or they go to the one their doctor practices at. And the prices published are not the same that their insurance company pays, so people can comparison shop and still not know where their medical care will be the most expensive.
Section 7 doesn't make much sense either. If a company has a patent on a drug then they are the sole source for that drug and there is no room for negotiation. Then price is the price. If the patent has expired then the drug prices are already priced competitively and there may be little to be gained through competition.
All in all I don't see where it will reduce healthcare costs for all Americans. It's an example that there really isn't much the government can do to provide healthcare for all so they should do nothing. It only makes it worse and more costly, especially for the government.
Crus isn't proposing a replacement for Obamacare. He believes that there is no role the government can play that won't make things worse, as anyone who has watched the Obamacare fiasco should know by now. So his position is repeal with no replacement.
He does not list a plan at all.
Why doesn’t he list a plan?
“...This will completely destroy the incentive of drug producers to develop new drugs...”
Your points are good, except for the one I quoted. Big-Pharma is not going to shut down their businesses because they lose their monopoly. There is still plenty of business to be had, even without an artificial monopoly. Their counter will be that FDA regulation (which is patently absurd in some instances) has a large chunk of blame to share for the high costs of doing “Pharma” business. The FDA will require a loooong overdue sanity check and review.
To be sure, Big-Pharma will squeal like a stuck pig, but I have no doubts they will keep finding some way to turn a substantial profit.
About half the states in the country have already enacted some sort of tort reform that caps malpractice awards. And while there is plenty of evidence showing that the reforms have reduced malpractice insurance premiums there is no evidence that it has reduced health insurance premiums or medical costs.
Like I said, Cruz has said all along that he wants to repeal Obamacare, not repeal and replace. So no plan because none is needed.
As with EVERYTHING else Trump says, it’s negotiable.
________________________________
Kind of like Cruz working with Ryan to pass TPA, voting for the Iran Corker bill, and supporting an increase in H1B visas...right?
There’s no pleasing you anti-Trump people- if he says something anti-conservative you say “see???” if he says something pro-conservative you say “he’s just telling you what he thinks you want to hear”
It’s a lose-lose discussion with guys
Well guess what- the establishment has been lying to you for decades!!!!!!!!!!! So do you Trust them more than Trump?
Don't know. The way I look at it, if a corporation can write something off as the cost of doing business, I should be able to write it off as the cost of doing my business, which is living and providing for family.
How do I sign up?
My reason for liking price transparency is more a function of age rather than enumerated powers or true vine conservative principles. There was a time when a patient could know that the pricing on the doctor or hospital bill was a reflection of all costs and the profit necessary for the service to continue. Today, it is nearly impossible to arrive at that conclusion due to the interference of Medicare and the insurance industry working to exercise their muscle as a “consumer” rather than the patient being first in the mind of the provider.
Mandates = Bad...gotcha, agreed — see Medicare comment above. At the base of the entire healthcare discussion, it remains a problem that costs have risen unchecked due to the disconnect of the patient from the payment through insurance. Other elements of this plan seek to turn that around so it stands to reason that if you want market forces to be paramount, true vine conservative principle #1 IMO, information is the primary lever the patient has as a market force. I’m all for any way that can be done without a mandate yet getting the information to the patient still deserves to be mentioned as a factor in any healthcare overhaul.
I'm with you, and so is Trump.
You KNOW he’s had this burning a hole in his pocket.
Don’t you love how DT knows how to let the other side blow and bluster? He then lays out the (next) plan which STOPS the other side in their tracks. Having NOTHING else to pivot on/to, they are left like fish out of water *Uh, uh, ah ah”.
DT has shown, again, you either put up, or shut up.
I might not agree 100% with the plan, but anything that removes the hands of govt is a move in the correct direction. Those in D.C. must be sweating BULLETS after this was out. “I can feel my power FADING, fading...”
The disconnect between price and patient is because in almost every instance, the patient doesn’t pay the bill.
You aren’t the customer.
In reality, your employer is your insurance’s customer not you. And that’s not even the biggest customer for most providers. Fed and state are 1 and 2.
The solution to price transparency isn’t more regulation. It’s placing control in the hands of the users.
It’s using HSAs for routine care and insurance only for catastrophic needs.
Even for chronic care, like diabetes and heart disease, most routine care decisions should be in the hands of the consumer. Any aid to help chronic care shouldn’t be taking over the care and being between consumer and provider.
Get out of the way of the free market and price transparency will resurface without regulation.
One final thought: wage controls during WWII brought about fringe benefits like health insurance and the government liked it so institutionalized it with tax breaks. The current system between you and your doc, from Medicare to Medicaid to employer insurance - they’re all government animals.
The solution isn’t more government; it’s less.
I’m not trying to be confrontational but conversational.
“As for how to pay for TrumpCare; I would suggest...”
Let’s PLEASE watch our verbiage. There’s no need to concede the debate by uttering such fallacy.
NOTHING ‘costs’ the govt. Property (IE: $$) is not theirs.
Thank you.
IMO, the ONLY ‘con’ I see is not having:
#8: The Law will be enforced in its entirety. All exemptions will be null/void.
You talk about a FAST un-law...
OK, you repeated what I wrote, only in long form. I stated the disconnect reason and you’ve expounded on it. Yet, you didn’t notice that I stated a preference for any change that achieves transparency without a mandate. I don’t feel confronted when you’re repeating my statements back in an extended way.
Also, I know the history of this dates to WW2 and wage/price controls so the root is already in economic nonsense. I’m taking the transparency statement in the Trump healthcare proposal as a start of a conversation that recognizes the economic power of an informed consumer. The methods to achieve that ought not to repeat the poor thinking that got us here.
You and I actually agree. If you’ll take a moment to compare your last post with my second post, the parallels should become clear. I fully agree with broader use of the HSA. As I noted in my second post, I am of an age that I can remember insurance being referred to as “hospitalization” as that was the major cost being insured, not the trip to the doctor’s office.
First of all let me say, I am not a Trump fan. Not anti Trump just not sold on him because until now the only plan about anything as been build a wall. This health care plan is exactly on point and I have to say, I’m impressed. Does anybody know regarding health savings has he mentioned removing the limitation on amount that can be put in? This is a big deal for families with members that have ongoing health issues in particular children with special needs. I believe the cap right now is $2500 a year. Some families with needs blow through that in January of each year.
I believe he addresses that in point number 4.
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.