He needs to transition himself.
Wow! That must’ve been a big payoff.
Transition to the free marketplace.
Is that so hard for this “senator” to understand?
The GOP plan is to transition to Romneycare.
The business interests wanted the new health care system to relieve their financial burdens and the GOPe does not want to dismantle any part of it that looks good in focus group polling.
National Review is full of Mandela worshippers, personally I could not care less about them now. They are not in any way a conservative website.
Here’s a novel idea, Senator. Repeal the entire steenking fascist/socialist mess and let freedom reign!!
Congress wouldn't handle immigration because they WOULD NOT ENFORCE THE LAW......it became "TOO BIG TO DEAL WITH"...because they wouldn't enforce the law....NOW when we have an outlaw running roughshod over the American citizen this clown doctor wants to "help" enforce something the American people never wanted.
"It's not the people who vote that count. It's the people who count the votes"
"all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"
Third World status in 3...2...1...
His point, I believe, is that it cannot be gotten rid of by outright repeal. At least not yet.
We are going to have to destroy the leviathan another way.
I suppose the analogy might be to a cancer.
Sometimes, one can cut the cancer immediately...in the early stages, before it has spread. If not stopped immediately, then the attack has to be done in different ways...by focusing on one particular part or aspect—to limit growth, choke off, or irradiate one particular aspect.
I don’t think Johnson wants the Obamacare cancer to grow, but he recognizes it is now within the system, and more creative ways of removing it have to be found.
Of course, once the body is HEALTHY enough (that is, once CONSERVATIVES are in control of the body politic if you’ll excuse the pun), then we OUGHT to be able to take a knife to the cancer...and remove it completely. Oh, they’ll be howls of “the pain, the pain”, by the media and the Democrat base.
But it’ll be for the good of the country. :)
From the comments so far, it’s apparent that most didn’t read what Johnson said, that his approach is to “repeal, dismantle, and transition to something better.”
Personally, I’m pleased to see someone take a realistic view of the mess, rather than just pitching a hissy fit. Yelling “No!” is not working.
We are going to transition you out of office Ron. Loser.
Here’s my contribution to your conversation, Ron.
No.
In other words, what do you do with all of the takers getting Medicaid or subsidized plans when you pull the plug and they freak?
Sounds like he transitioned himself to the category of Quisling.
And that "something better" is...?
It all depends on what he wants to replace it with.
The health care market was hardly a bastion of freedom and free markets before DeathCare was imposed.
If the goals are to increase the number of folks who can afford health insurance, then the model for health insurance and for payment of health care needs to move toward a consumer-driven model - one where the consumer cares about costs, and has clear choices between health care options as often as possible.
There are a few things that could be done universally to improve the situation. Most folks should know these by heart: tort reform and all the reforms that would go with it; interstate competition between insurance plans and providers; enforcing a bare minimum of minimum benefits.
But other important areas ripe for improvement include: shifting the tax advantages of health insurance to the insured rather than the employer, thus empowering consumers to make their own insurance choices; encouraging REAL INSURANCE, not pre-paid health care, in other words, primarily catastrophic, or what we used to call “major medical,” insurance;” discouraging “first dollar” coverage and discouraging coverage for routine care, which is essentially like paying your auto insurer to pay for your oil changes; highly advantaged Health Savings Accounts to encourage folks to take responsibility for the routine and non-catastrophic health stuff. These things would be done to move as much of health care to direct, cash (or check or credit card) payment for services, cutting the insurance company out of the loop.
Other possible reforms include encouraging health care providers to provide package pricing for non-emergency procedures and surgeries paid in cash; insurance companies using “reference pricing.”
By making folks more directly responsible for the cost of their health care, market forces can be brought to bear, lowering prices, improving quality, and improving access to health care for everyone.
So, yes, if Sen. Johnson is talking about these sorts of reforms that bring the health care market closer to a true, free market, these things would be very good. AND, packaged together, could be presented as the alternative to DeathCare by Obama. It’s easier to beat something with something else than to beat something with nothing.
He now lacks some cred.