Posted on 08/25/2018 4:16:11 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
Ten GOP senators this week introduced legislation that they say would protect ObamaCare provisions for people with pre-existing conditions.
The bill, introduced on Thursday, comes as congressional Democrats try to tie Republicans to the Trump administration's decision not to defend some ObamaCare provisions in a federal lawsuit filed by red states.
The legislation is an effort by the GOP to push back on the Democratic attacks, and it shows the concern among Republicans over the court case ahead of the midterms.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
So in short, it's legislation claiming to protect coverage for pre-existing conditions that guarantees that an insurance company can exclude to cover you for pre-existing conditions if they choose.
Leave it to the GOP to come up with an alternative that has a gap in it guaranteed to give the Democrats something to hammer them with.
So google and Apple and twitter and visa and MasterCard can discriminate and iboerson people they don’t want.
But insurance companies must cover people who refuse to buy insurance, get sick and then try to sign up for medical coverage because it’s not “fair”.
This country is so screwed.
All of this just paves the way to ‘medicare-for-all’. You will get affordable health insurance then, but it’ll be marginal care. And that slogan ‘but you can keep your doctor’? Don’t worry about that...about one-third of all doctors will just quit the entire system, and only accept you if you have cash in hand for their care.
I agree.
Healthcare is the one issue, that the GOP seems to me, to be completely sold out on.
It is massively overpriced, and excludes people in circumstances, exactly like what is mentioned here. And things exactly like this are then done, and the GOP is HAMMERED for it.
I understand there will be those who take issue with me for saying this, but I really do not think the GOP should be doing this.
This is TERRIBLY non-productive.
Almost catastrophically, in fact. Terrible politically.
Way off base.
Of course I am just one opinion, but I KNOW I am not alone in thinking this.
Not at all.
The same usual Rino suspects.
If government would just get out of health care entirely, or near entirely, costs would just go down.
Obamacare could have been avoided by 2 simple changes
No exclusion for pre-existing conditions and community pricing.
These 2 simple changes, are what should have been done, and had they been the entire fiasco of Obamacare and trillions burned for it would have been avoided.
Unfortunately politically, there is a segment of the population that are frankly idiotic, that believe the market solves all, just as others stupidly as others believe the government solves all.
Insurance, is simply the socialization of risk, it’s a fundamentally socialist construct, to argue that unbridled capitalism can thusly be applied to it and wind up with a successful outcome is beyond stupid.
If your goal is to ensure all persons have access to health insurance, which by proxy, is neccessary in the United States to receive quality care, then those 2 simple changes maximize coverage and minimize overall impact to the system, that’s the solution.
Those market Uber alles types and their flat out refusal to accept reality are ensuring that eventually the US is going to sooner or later wind up with single payer. What they also fail to grasp is those with those pre-existing conditions health costs are being picked up by the state already.
This “bill” by the GOP is beyond stupid, and they will rightfully get beat up on this. If you think the GOPe cares about what’s right with the American people you have missed the last 40 years. With the exceptions of Reagan and Trump who FORCED the party’s hand on certain issues, the party as a whole has not put what is right at the top of the list for most domestic policy.
They may not be as whackadoo as the democrats, don’t kid yourself into thinking they aren’t serving their own puppet masters at the end of the day that aren’t you and I.
What the hell do you think makes health care "massively overpriced" in the first place?
ALL of congress should be forced onto Medicare.
THEN let them make decisions on healthcare.
What you just described is guanranteed issue and community rating. That is the very core of Obamacare. Volumes have been written on why that is a bad idea, and we have now seen it in practice with the failure of ObamaCare. It also doesn’t work without compelling people to buy insurance through something like the individual mandate.
You are basically proposing replacing ObamaCare with a less functional ObamaCare. No thanks.
You mean make it fair for the people who don’t have pre-existing conditions. Of course there needs to be a way to exclude uninsurables and put them in a high risk pool.
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.
If insurance is required to cover a pre-existing condition, then it is not insurance anymore. It is just an inefficient way to pay for something (if you let the insurer charge a fair premium), or a way to force other people to pay for it (if you require “community rating”as under Obamacare).
If your auto insurance functioned as your medical insurance, it would cover oil changes, new tires and breakdowns. How “affordable” would it be then? If your homeowners insurance functioned as your medical insurance, it would cover broken faucets and windows, a new water heater and major appliances, and lawn maintenance.
Medical costs are inflated because nobody who is consuming the service is directly paying for it. Since cost is never a consideration, prices can escalate as necessary. Once we have guaranteed universal coverage, demand will be infinity. How can a finite treasury pay for infinite demand?
No I am not and that silliness is exactly why sooner or later you will have single payer... several states had already implemented the two changes I spoke of and were not “disasters”. To claim the trillions of dollars and thousands of pages of regulatory and legislation that’s was obamare are what I proposed is nonsensical and ignorant.
I work in health care, both insurance and delivery and if you think what Obamacare is what I proposed I can tell you you are grossly ignorant.
The only way a third-party payment process can ever work in any industry is when the "third party" in question has the authority to establish EVERY TERM of the transaction.
Any Freeper who deludes themselves into thinking "health care" can ever be affordable under a third-party payment model is delusional. This only works if the "third party" has the authority to control payments and/or deny treatments.
Maybe the best way to address this is not with insurance, but going at it through the supply side. Make medical care so much less expensive through increased competition and smart deregulation that only catastrophic insurance is needed by most.
Thanks DoodleDawg. And well summarized.
With today’s insurance system, it’s really the only way. Most people get their insurance through employers. The average job these days is only 4-5 years or so. Lifetime employment at one place is unheard of any longer.
With all of that bouncing around, there needs to be some protections.
Until we have a better system, I don’t see any way around this.
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.