If people are gonna get to right off their healthcare premiums, doesn’t that mean that the government, we the people ,are paying for everyone’s healthcare?
Number 2 is a red herring. Any insurance company can sell policies in any state provided they meet state laws. The problem is that each state has their own mandates and restrictions which make policies more or less expensive.
What’s Trump going to do, forbid states from passing laws?
> “The decision to go against the idea of an individual mandate is new for Trump, who told CNN during a February town hall before the South Carolina primary that he “likes the mandate” and that makes him “a little bit different” than other conservatives.”
I reviewed in depth the exact exchange and the mandate DT referred to were the NY State mandates to treat all people at ERs, else people would literally be dying in the streets.
NBC and other national media and their local affiliates continue to take his statements out of the intended contexts.
#5 won’t do anything. If the insurance company is paying the tab, the patient won’t care about the cost of a particular procedure.
From a related thread about Trumpcare …
After reading about Trumpcare on Trump’s web site, Trump and his institutionally indoctrinated advisors (blind leading the blind) are evidently still as clueless as Obama’s first, low-information Democratic-controlled Congress was that the states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate, tax and spend for INTRAstate healthcare purposes. This is evidenced by the excerpts from Suprme Court case opinions further down in this post, the excerpts written by previous generations of state sovereignty-respecting justices.
Regarding major problems with Trumpcare, consider that Trump’s proposal for federal interstate health insurance reform actually has the same major constitutional problem as the Obamacare insurance mandate.
More specifically, regardless what lawless Obama’s state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices want everybody to think about the constitutionality of the Obamacare insurance mandate, note the fourth entry in the list below from Paul v. Virginia. In that case, state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified that regulating insurance is not within the scope of Congress’s Commerce Clause powers (1.8.3), regardless if the parties negotiating the insurance policy are domiciled in different states.
”State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress. [emphases added]” - Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
”Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” - Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
”Inspection laws, quarantine laws, health laws of every description [emphasis added], as well as laws for regulating the internal commerce of a state and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c., are component parts of this mass.” -Justice Barbour, New York v. Miln., 1837.
” 4. The issuing of a policy of insurance is not a transaction of commerce within the meaning of the latter of the two clauses, even though the parties be domiciled in different States, but is a simple contract [emphasis added] of indemnity against loss.” - Paul v. Virginia, 1869. (The corrupt feds have no Commerce Clause (1.8.3) power to regulate insurance.)
”Direct control of medical practice in the states is obviously [emphases added] beyond the power of Congress.” - Linder v. United States, 1925.
The above excerpts are why I’ve been ranting that Trump needs to be promoting a healthcare amendment to the Constitution on the campaign trail. (Note that the states are not obligated to ratify any proposed amendment to the Constitution.)
Remember in November !
When patriots elect Trump, Cruz, or whatever conservative they elect, they also need to elect a new, state sovereignty-respecting Congress that will not only work within its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers to support the president, but also protect the states from unconstitutional federal government overreach as evidenced by unconstitutional federal healthcare programs, Obama’s or Trump's.
Also, consider that such a Congress would probably be willing to fire state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices.
I’d like to see a Donald Trump administration go after the pharmaceutical industry’s purveyors of designer prescription medications that have disturbing side effects. What I’ve read about drugs like Meloxicam and my own negative experience with Prednisone for a minor inner ear infection really changed my mind about all these drugs handed out like candy by doctors working for pharma.
All you have to do is watch any cable network news channel during the election season to see five commercials an hour calling on you to “ask your doctor about Wackticrus, the night time sleep aid... (Side effects may include suicidal thoughts, bizarre behavior ending in Police gunfire, offspring drowning, and shooting up your community college)”. People should be in prison over this shit.
Slowly but surely they’re getting the entire nation strung out on experimental goo goo pills for every single little ailment under the sun. And you look around and wonder how America started acting so crazy all of a sudden. Check the number of Americans being administered prescription drugs and that might tell us something. Take the spree shooters of the last several years for instance. Every single one was on some kind of medication that profoundly modified their behavior. It wasn’t the NRA who gave them those goo goo pills. It was American medicine that did it.
Bookmark
Never ceases to amaze me when “conservatives” argue for saving insurance companies, the ultimate progressive icon.
Trump Ping
Looks remarkably similar to Cruz’ plan which Cruz has been advocating for years. Trump is a little late to the party; and as always, everything with Trump is negotiable.
Portability of insurance should also be a part of any healthcare reform. I don’t know if laws need to be enacted to enable that or not. I didn’t see it mentioned in Trump’s 7 points, but I did hear Trump say he agreed with the concept when asked about it by Hannity last week.
Require price transparency from all healthcare providers, especially doctors and healthcare organizations like clinics and hospitals. Individuals should be able to shop to find the best prices for procedures, exams or any other medical-related procedure.
This is outstanding and long overdue. The complete lack of price transparency is what has made a complete mess of our healthcare system.
Trump got to the issue, studied it, got some wise advise and NAILED IT !!
Not one of the others had said definitively they'd get rid of the mandate. That's a crucial step. Because of it, a person goes to get medical care, and the provider chooses the most profitable available option..
Example: what is this with people in their late 80s and 90s getting replacement shoulders, hips, and knees? Several around here know of someone who died of the infection they got in the hospital stay for the surgery.
Here is a Primer on Direct Primary Care Services which is missing from Trumps Document: http://www.senatorpatrickcolbeck.com/healthcare-reform-strategy/direct-primary-care-services/
Also this plan needs to be Prototyped. Let the House, Senate, and Whitehouse staff and yes the Trumps adopt it for 6 months and work out the kinks.
However, if it is as good as I think it might be, offer it to our Vets and Current Military personnel via an equal cash swap to buy a plan, & HSA contribute etc. vs the average spending per Vet the VA is now getting.
To the Trump team, are you lurking here? Feel free to steal out ideas!
“We must review basic options for Medicaid and work with states to ensure that those who want healthcare coverage can have it.”
Um... Isn’t this socialized medicine???
Since when does the government do ANYTHING right???
I do not get how any honest conservative can seriously consider this liberal as our nominee for President...
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.
2. Will this 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.
He lives in reality - many conjure up visions of a government that will allow folks to die in the streets - they are the ones who open the door for ObamaCare and Trump wants competition among doctors/insurance companies, remove the State barriers that currently exist and take care of those who can’t afford it but only for necessary treatments instead of leaving the whole menu open. It’s a huge step in the right direction even though there are many who would rather leaving a smoking crater in what we currently have w/o any thought as to how to keep the pieces together until such time as the new system shows things that need to be changed. It ain’t a LEGO set where you can tear it all apart and stash it in a box for a while then slap it back together again.
It would be nice to hear Donald Trump actually say these things. Unfortunately though, what Donald Trump actually says contradicts what his website says.
If Cruz continues to say that Trump is for Obamacare and for expanding Obamacare he is official lying.
That said, this is a plan the country could unite behind. Best of all, this plan could put ObamaCare six feet under and give health care choices back to We the People.