With these Medicaid cuts, many seniors now and in the future will be left to fend for themselves or die should they become ill. Most disabled seniors and their families cannot afford in-house care for bathing, dressing, feeding, etc and must resort to Medicaid for nursing home care. The fastest growing age group is the 85 group. Medicaid cuts affect everyone -- not just the seniors themselves but their adult children and even grandkids, who sometimes have to reduce work hours or stop working to care for family.
1
I wish Democrats would call these tax cuts what they are: subsidies.
We American are giving subsidies to rich people. Why do they deserve subsidies? They don't grow soybeans, or raise dairy cows. They just have money. So we subsidize that now? Boy.
We American are giving subsidies to rich people. Why do they deserve subsidies? They don't grow soybeans, or raise dairy cows. They just have money. So we subsidize that now? Boy.
2
Trump and his Republican Party of Nyet are expert on disinformation just like the Russians. The Republican leadership put forth one of their decades old efforts to destroy Medicaid. The bulk of people on Medicaid are the elderly in nursing homes and disabled children. These are the Americans that will get hurt the most. Once the costs of Medicaid are passed on to the states, it's me and you that will get hurt by having to pay more in taxes to support state run Medicaid, and of course, all those out of pocket costs. Conservatives want to bleed us out. They are not Christian in their beliefs. They work to hurt people. They vote Republican.
Then, Trump with the help of the news media starts with his insane tweets. The Troll thinks his cool being the bad boy from NY. He's a loser along with his biker friends.
All this gets Americans to stop thinking about how Trump and the RNC stole the 2016 presidential elections from Hillary Clinton and the American voter.
Trump will do anything to get people to not think about the Russian cyber war.
Trump, the only American president elected by and for the people of Russian, and a few bikers.
Then, Trump with the help of the news media starts with his insane tweets. The Troll thinks his cool being the bad boy from NY. He's a loser along with his biker friends.
All this gets Americans to stop thinking about how Trump and the RNC stole the 2016 presidential elections from Hillary Clinton and the American voter.
Trump will do anything to get people to not think about the Russian cyber war.
Trump, the only American president elected by and for the people of Russian, and a few bikers.
Here's an idea. Instead of focusing so myopically on how much we spend on Medicaid programs. Why don't politicians focus on programs that would improve the health of those that rely on Medicaid. You know like improving their overall economic conditions. Medicaid spending would drop automatically as a result. Problem solved. Unfortunately from a Repub standpoint that would require more oversight of the "free market" and Lord knows we can't have that, so we'll just keep kicking the poors to the curb....
2
Neither either house bill does anything to change the root causes of health care expense. We spend twice or more what other countries do for poorer outcomes. Regarding that skin in the game idea: we already have more in the game than other nations citizens. A reason cited for part of the poorer health outcomes of Americans is that we delay seeking medical treatment.
Just another GOP fallacy....
The GOP just has no interest in giving us a better health plan, only the illusion of one. (Along with the illusion that they are fiscally responsible--robbing the poor for the wealthy, so in tax reform they can further reward the wealthy?)
Sinful.
Just another GOP fallacy....
The GOP just has no interest in giving us a better health plan, only the illusion of one. (Along with the illusion that they are fiscally responsible--robbing the poor for the wealthy, so in tax reform they can further reward the wealthy?)
Sinful.
4
"allow insurers to sell cheaper, less comprehensive health plans"
Isn't that like a degree from Trump U compared to a real one, and about as useful at a hospital admission desk?
Isn't that like a degree from Trump U compared to a real one, and about as useful at a hospital admission desk?
6
R's show their contempt for people by pushing these sub-standard plans that just make people think they're insured. Every time John McCain parrots that line about "selling insurance across state lines," I want to scream.
Like I live in Santa Monica, California but my best option is buying a policy from Mississippi or Alabama or Louisiana or Kansas? Who thinks that's a serious real-world proposal?
Like I live in Santa Monica, California but my best option is buying a policy from Mississippi or Alabama or Louisiana or Kansas? Who thinks that's a serious real-world proposal?
4
The rich say that increasing taxes on their capital gains -- which are taxed at half the rate as taxes on actual labor -- will "kill jobs." But now the technology that the rich invest in actually replaces humans with machines, robots and computers -- it is the investment by the rich that is the real job killer. Meanwhile, working people need more opportunities to own the tools and technology they use to earn a living.
The capital gains tax should be zero percent for working people as they try to save what they earn, and it should be the same rate as the income tax for wealthy people who merely live off of their investments and don't really work at all.
The disparity in tax rates between wealthy investors and the working middle class is a major driver of expanding inequality in our economy.
The capital gains tax should be zero percent for working people as they try to save what they earn, and it should be the same rate as the income tax for wealthy people who merely live off of their investments and don't really work at all.
The disparity in tax rates between wealthy investors and the working middle class is a major driver of expanding inequality in our economy.
The Republicans really need to give this one up and work together with the Democrats to improve Obamacare since that is what most Americans want. Working together to improve something - what a concept!!!
This legislation would appear to fall within the definition of manslaughter. And it would not be involuntary or reckless manslaughter, but intentional maiming and many tens of thousands of unnecessary deaths.
Instead of Senate Republicans trying to crush Medicai, someone should encourage them to crush healthcare costs. It bears repeating, again and again, that Americans are paying twice as much for healthcare as some of the other advanced countries. If Americans would only demand of our congress that we pay the same amount for prescription drugs and Epipens, as Canadians, we could save a hundred billion dollars a year toward solving our healthcare problems.
4
If existing law remains in place, within 15 years mandatory spending for interest expense, national defense Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security will squeeze out all other spending. There will be nothing left for PBS, NIH, road and bridge infrastructure, education, internet for the poor or anything else.
The Republicans are attempting to peel back spending for those who do not need it. People with $1 million homes will lose their ability to deduct their property taxes and will have to pay higher taxes. If their 26 year old college graduate son or daughter is living in their million dollar home and working off-the-books for the uncle, he or she will no longer be eligible for $193 per month in food stamps and free Medicaid. They'll have to pay for their own contraceptives and visit to alcohol rehabilitation. Wealthy early retirees living in their million dollar homes will have to pay $12,000 for their health insurance out of their $2 million 401(k)s until they hit 65 and then will have to pay Medicare premiums of $600/month instead of $100/month. They will have to pay income taxes on their Social Security as well as on their required withdrawals from their deferred compensation. If retirees had income over $170,000 per year, their SS benefits may be reduced to cover only their Medicare premiums. If they can't afford their million dollar homes anymore, they'll have to sell and buy a $500,000 condo.
The Republicans are attempting to peel back spending for those who do not need it. People with $1 million homes will lose their ability to deduct their property taxes and will have to pay higher taxes. If their 26 year old college graduate son or daughter is living in their million dollar home and working off-the-books for the uncle, he or she will no longer be eligible for $193 per month in food stamps and free Medicaid. They'll have to pay for their own contraceptives and visit to alcohol rehabilitation. Wealthy early retirees living in their million dollar homes will have to pay $12,000 for their health insurance out of their $2 million 401(k)s until they hit 65 and then will have to pay Medicare premiums of $600/month instead of $100/month. They will have to pay income taxes on their Social Security as well as on their required withdrawals from their deferred compensation. If retirees had income over $170,000 per year, their SS benefits may be reduced to cover only their Medicare premiums. If they can't afford their million dollar homes anymore, they'll have to sell and buy a $500,000 condo.
Who will pay to scoop up and dispose of the bodies once the GOP "plan" really kicks in?
Does any one have a patent on Soylent Green yet?
Does any one have a patent on Soylent Green yet?
1
If the Republican's are successful in repealing the ACA, I recommend sending our President all our sick, the crippled, the deformed, the 'Wretched Refuse'. If we send one million, and they all get arrested, at least they can get health care in prison.
1
Part of the difficulty the GOP has is convincing the public that it's good for America to have health care system that increases homelessness, addiction, chronic illness rates, infant mortality, elderly suffering and early death, etc. in order to protect the profitability of insurance companies and other industry players so that they can meet their corporate executive peer group compensation targets. Must be a messaging problem
1
Seems the GOP, despite their 7 year objection to the ACA, had nothing, nothing, to offer in return. Usually, when one objects to a current policy it is because they have something better to bring to the table. It's clear the current GOP occupants of the House and Senate never had, nor currently have, a better plan than the ACA; of course unless they propose a single payer option. The slap dash plans proposed by each body are a cruel, thinly disguised, tax cut for the wealthy presented as a health plan. The GOP occupants lack the qualifications for their job, They cannot legislate. You can list their accomplishments on a matchbook cover with room left over. When a person cannot perform the job they are hired to do they are usually fired. Why wait for 2018, 2020, or 2022?
2
In a world where people needed to drive in order to live but the only cars built were Ferraris that no one but the rich could afford, would the answer be to give subsidies to people to buy Ferraris or come up with a more modest car that they could afford but would still get get them where they needed to go even though it couldn't go 200 mph? There are two sides to every equation.
1
Mitch and Cornyn have their health insurance. Why can't everyone just imitate them? More seriously, if this passage attempt fails, the GOP will try to hobble the ACA and then claim that since it is failing, they must have a replacement, someday.
1
Can someone tell me why the cutting of Medicaid spending is so important, such a sought after goal, for this man and his followers?
There is little waste and persistent auditing can reduce what little there is, even more.
What is wrong with making sure that those with no means are not literally freezing in the streets and dying from treatable conditions? What has got their goat over this one area of spending?
There is little waste and persistent auditing can reduce what little there is, even more.
What is wrong with making sure that those with no means are not literally freezing in the streets and dying from treatable conditions? What has got their goat over this one area of spending?
2
It is pretty clear that people get old, get sick, and eventually die. This costs money and it happens to most people except those who die young. There is no way to avoid spending the money, so the money spent has to come from somewhere and get transferred to people who provide services for people getting old, getting sick, and dying.
So eventually the people getting the money have to accept less money for their services or the people getting old, getting sick, and dying need to accept that they need less services as they age out of this world.
Until acceptance happens, Medicaid will be costly.
So eventually the people getting the money have to accept less money for their services or the people getting old, getting sick, and dying need to accept that they need less services as they age out of this world.
Until acceptance happens, Medicaid will be costly.
I don't trust McConnell....he'll just put the tax break somewhere else. The GOP is determined to give to the rich by taking from the poor. Until voters vote them out of office our country is stuck with these thieves. They are Robinhood in reverse.
1
McConnell looks like he realized they Shkreli'd it. May this fail and may every cruel selfish hurt-the-poor to help the rich plan fail forevermore.
1
The Republican scheme to kill off the poor in this country has fully been exposed.
4
Please put this "35 percent drop in Medicaid" as your top news item, instead of the gleeful tallying of reactions to the President's latest tweet.
Learn from that great book of wisdom, the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, which praised Zaphod Beeblebrox as the best Galactic president ever, because he was superb at antics that distracted the trillions from what the government is really doing.
Learn from that great book of wisdom, the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, which praised Zaphod Beeblebrox as the best Galactic president ever, because he was superb at antics that distracted the trillions from what the government is really doing.
36
Let them eat coal. And pay the Medical bills with chickens. Right, GOP???
12
There is tremendous fraud and abuse in Medicaid. Just this week over a dozen people were arrested in NJ for many years of Medicaid and other benefits fraud which is pervasive in some communities.
Cutting Medicaid would force the enforcers to clean up the fraud which is a good thing. Let them also pass laws that forbids further childbearing while on Medicaid or any other benefit. Working taxpayers have no obligation to finance other peoples' desire to have multiple children while they are on taxpayer support.
Cutting Medicaid would force the enforcers to clean up the fraud which is a good thing. Let them also pass laws that forbids further childbearing while on Medicaid or any other benefit. Working taxpayers have no obligation to finance other peoples' desire to have multiple children while they are on taxpayer support.
2
You must be perfect and lucky--no parents needing nursing care, no handicapped children, and certainly you assume you will develop no serious illness ...or age.
If only we could all be so lucky.
If only we could all be so lucky.
1
Medicaid also pays for the destitute elderly in nursing homes. Should we pass laws prohibiting people from getting old?
It would take a miracle to stop people on Medicaid from reproducing. We can only hope.
Here is my message to Republicans gutting our healthcare system:
Do you really think that your extreme measures will persist for very long after you are no longer in control of the government? Take to heart Newton's third law - For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. See what you are doing to O'Care, which is extreme from your perspective?
If you moderate your draconian measures, and work with the opposing forces (The Dems), what you want for our healthcare system will be part of the plan much farther into the future.
In some ways, I support what the GOP is doing because the most-opposite reaction will come back so much stronger, with the healthcare system I strongly prefer, Single Payer. Whichever Democrats champion Single Payer will most likely glide into office, as this is the preeminent issue for all Americans.
Do you really think that your extreme measures will persist for very long after you are no longer in control of the government? Take to heart Newton's third law - For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. See what you are doing to O'Care, which is extreme from your perspective?
If you moderate your draconian measures, and work with the opposing forces (The Dems), what you want for our healthcare system will be part of the plan much farther into the future.
In some ways, I support what the GOP is doing because the most-opposite reaction will come back so much stronger, with the healthcare system I strongly prefer, Single Payer. Whichever Democrats champion Single Payer will most likely glide into office, as this is the preeminent issue for all Americans.
5
We have the worst social service program in the developed world--- by far. It is a crazy patchwork of government, secular non-profit, and church agencies that leaves plenty of gaping holes. We can see the result in our 3rd-world like outcomes: school drop-out rates, teen pregnancies, violent crime, incarceration, opioid use and drug-related deaths.
Does anyone who has a pulse, who has been paying attention since the Reagan years, actually believe our health care system will be any better?
All of this, of course, is justified by saying that Americans suffer all this to enable them to have a better shot at boot-strapping, at rising up from humble beginnings--- that wonderful American Dream.
Unfortunately, irrefutable historical and current statistical evidence overwhelmingly shows America now lags far behind other developed nations in class mobility.
Oh well, pass me that legal marijuana cigarette, would you please?
Does anyone who has a pulse, who has been paying attention since the Reagan years, actually believe our health care system will be any better?
All of this, of course, is justified by saying that Americans suffer all this to enable them to have a better shot at boot-strapping, at rising up from humble beginnings--- that wonderful American Dream.
Unfortunately, irrefutable historical and current statistical evidence overwhelmingly shows America now lags far behind other developed nations in class mobility.
Oh well, pass me that legal marijuana cigarette, would you please?
2
And English has more words for "money" than any other language. Does this tell us anything?
This bought man McConnell is a farce....how well off are his constituents that vote him into office that they are willing to accept the outcomes of his policies?
In America the common folk outnumber the billionaire class 1 000 000 to 1, yet the common folk can't vote for policies that will benefit themselves. I wonder why that is ?
Maybe the billionaires, through their media agents, have hijacked the brains of ordinary folk and are commanding these zombie folks to vote for McConnell types, to serve the billionaire class.
People who can't think for themselves, and who do not vote their interests, are voluntary slaves....in the land of the Free.
In America the common folk outnumber the billionaire class 1 000 000 to 1, yet the common folk can't vote for policies that will benefit themselves. I wonder why that is ?
Maybe the billionaires, through their media agents, have hijacked the brains of ordinary folk and are commanding these zombie folks to vote for McConnell types, to serve the billionaire class.
People who can't think for themselves, and who do not vote their interests, are voluntary slaves....in the land of the Free.
5
“It’s not equitable to have a situation where you’re increasing the burden on lower-income citizens and lessening the burden on wealthy citizens,” said Senator Bob Corker, Republican of Tennessee. “That’s not a proposition that is sustainable, and I think leadership knows that.” Then why was it a major part of their bill?
They can pretend and spin as much as they want, but their goal was to sacrifice the poor to get more money to the rich. Cut medicaid forever and give the fat cats a big bonus. Shameful. Perhaps they should start with a mission statement, "to make health care accessible to all" and then work from there.
I feel bad the Republicans might get so desperate that they would consider negotiating with the Democrats. There are improvements that could be made, price prescriptions the same as they are in Canada, for example.
They can pretend and spin as much as they want, but their goal was to sacrifice the poor to get more money to the rich. Cut medicaid forever and give the fat cats a big bonus. Shameful. Perhaps they should start with a mission statement, "to make health care accessible to all" and then work from there.
I feel bad the Republicans might get so desperate that they would consider negotiating with the Democrats. There are improvements that could be made, price prescriptions the same as they are in Canada, for example.
1
Can McConell and his pals cut with the phony spinning ?
I am SO SICK of not getting the straight story form elecetd officials, (WE PAY THEM!)
Just call it what it - ** shifting tax dollars from services for regular Americans to yet more tax cuts for the rich.
People will let you know if they like that idea.
So - please - just stop your baloney.
You sat on your hands for 7 years and did nothing but complain. (We paid you for that ?)
Now you proposing legislative contortions that are disguised as something
they are not (see above **)
Just come clean. You will feel better. We will too.
I am SO SICK of not getting the straight story form elecetd officials, (WE PAY THEM!)
Just call it what it - ** shifting tax dollars from services for regular Americans to yet more tax cuts for the rich.
People will let you know if they like that idea.
So - please - just stop your baloney.
You sat on your hands for 7 years and did nothing but complain. (We paid you for that ?)
Now you proposing legislative contortions that are disguised as something
they are not (see above **)
Just come clean. You will feel better. We will too.
13
The GOP would prefer to have survival of the fittest - no healthcare at all.
Their real goal is to nake money for the 1% (themselves included).
They are not there for anyone else.
Their real goal is to nake money for the 1% (themselves included).
They are not there for anyone else.
13
When you accept an "authority" to dictate your choices, you are by definition a slave. This is a power/money grab by people who do not have the interests of humanity at heart. Only their own.
2
"Republican leaders and Trump administration officials had agreed to $45 billion for an opioid treatment fund."
So GOP is willing to pay for drug addicts. But if you are sober and poor, and have the bad luck to get cancer or have Type 1 Diabetes through no fault of your own, you are out of luck.
I thought the Republicans were supposed to be the Party of Personal Responsibility.
What a bunch of cynical hypocrites.
So GOP is willing to pay for drug addicts. But if you are sober and poor, and have the bad luck to get cancer or have Type 1 Diabetes through no fault of your own, you are out of luck.
I thought the Republicans were supposed to be the Party of Personal Responsibility.
What a bunch of cynical hypocrites.
15
The millennials also get a bad part of this deal. While the rich will be able to pass on their wealth "tax free," the middle class won't have any wealth to pass on. If mom has to sell her house to pay for the nursing home, that means that she won't be leaving it to you.
11
I think what we're seeing here is a major paradigm shift--the ultimate embrace of a more "socialistic" system of government. I don't think that's a bad thing, but the fight between left and right is so intense because of its deeper philosophical underpinnings.
2
It is even more confusing than just philosophy, because the folks who will get hurt the most (I am talking to you citizens of Kentucky) are the people who most support the likes of Rand, McConell and Trump.
Puzzling indeed..... (maybe they watch much Faux News ?)
I'm all set and I'll be fine w/o ACA (but I still totally want it for my country)
Go figure......
Puzzling indeed..... (maybe they watch much Faux News ?)
I'm all set and I'll be fine w/o ACA (but I still totally want it for my country)
Go figure......
Health Savings Accounts, like 401(k)s, are vehicles that benefit the wealthy few at the expense of the struggling many. In 15 years of patient financial counseling I have never met a moderate income earner that had the wherewithal to contribute and why would they, the tax advantages to them are negligible compared to the hassle of participating.
14
Americans MUST understand that one CANNOT make a silk purse out of sow's ears!!
Unless they appreciate that healthcare MUST be at par with policing/judiciary and military, this shenanigan is bound to continue! Americans don't have any qualms about spending more money to build more jails and jail more people. Rarely, if ever, they complain about military boondoggles.
Here in Canada, we have addressed ALL three. Our healthcare and resulting health are better. Our crime rates are LOWER than that of US. And - AND - Canada has ALWAYS punched above its weight, starting with WWII when it comes to the military!
US Senate is playing musical chair with funding! They cannot just reduce the number of chairs and hope to have better healthcare. That is SIMPLY impossible. Instead, they have to ADD more "chairs" by increasing funding to make it even more universal than Obamacare.
If one thinks that the US can do better in healhcare with what Senate is currently thinking, one must be dreaming in color!!
Unless they appreciate that healthcare MUST be at par with policing/judiciary and military, this shenanigan is bound to continue! Americans don't have any qualms about spending more money to build more jails and jail more people. Rarely, if ever, they complain about military boondoggles.
Here in Canada, we have addressed ALL three. Our healthcare and resulting health are better. Our crime rates are LOWER than that of US. And - AND - Canada has ALWAYS punched above its weight, starting with WWII when it comes to the military!
US Senate is playing musical chair with funding! They cannot just reduce the number of chairs and hope to have better healthcare. That is SIMPLY impossible. Instead, they have to ADD more "chairs" by increasing funding to make it even more universal than Obamacare.
If one thinks that the US can do better in healhcare with what Senate is currently thinking, one must be dreaming in color!!
8
Where is the concern about Death Panels? It was the top of the GOP's mind seven years ago...
10
And why aren't the Democrats yelling about "death panels" the way the Republicans would? Something fishy about that.
Oh good. People who can't afford insurance now can put their "savings" into tax-free "Health Savings Accounts" in order to cover the inevitable increases the insurance companies will levy to cover the premiums they still won't be able to afford. Got it!
11
Now that Donald Trump and Mitch McConnell have joined hands at the altar of Politics over People and completely screwed up any prospect for better health care for Americans (whether you're a Democrat or a Republican), they want to unload the blame on everybody but themselves.
The dance this week has been nothing less than appalling and could have been avoided if integrity had been playing the tune instead of childish outdated party politics and, of course, the even more childish and vulgar distractions of the JOTUS.
The dance this week has been nothing less than appalling and could have been avoided if integrity had been playing the tune instead of childish outdated party politics and, of course, the even more childish and vulgar distractions of the JOTUS.
2
What's striking is how little we hear from the defenders about how the removal of taxes on investment income over $250,000 is good for everybody because of trickle down. Even that go-to defense for tax cuts for the wealthiest can't be deployed for something that is so obviously gratuitous. They have finally beaten that dead horse so much that it can't be beaten any longer.
7
If we had Single Payer healthcare we wouldn't need to quibble about drug addiction treatment. Perhaps we could save money from overcrowding prisons with drug addicts, also.
4
But how would that help Jeff Sessions' investments in for profit prisons?
Time for a quick math lesson. Based on the 2010 census data, 40.5% of the population of Kentucky was 45 or older, a slightly higher percentage than the US overall at 39.4%. Now, let's say that it is seven years later do we think that these same percentages hold relatively steady or has there been a baby boom in Kentucky and the US overall? Let's say for the sake of our discussion that the rates remain constant.
Now, with an older population in Kentucky and the United States as a whole, do we think the demand for healthcare will:
a. Increase
b. Decrease
c. Stay the same
If you said increase, than should the corresponding funding for healthcare:
a. Increase
b. Decrease
c. Stay the Same
Interested in these and more facts?
https://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-03.pdf
Now, with an older population in Kentucky and the United States as a whole, do we think the demand for healthcare will:
a. Increase
b. Decrease
c. Stay the same
If you said increase, than should the corresponding funding for healthcare:
a. Increase
b. Decrease
c. Stay the Same
Interested in these and more facts?
https://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-03.pdf
3
We are debating who pays or how much to cut, but it blows my mind why we are not debating how to control the rising cost of healthcare. By turning the rich and the poor against each other, the healthcare industry appears to be simply sitting back and profiting - we are not giving them enough incentive to cut costs or be as efficient as they could be. As anyone that works in private industry knows, constraints drive efficiency, and right now, there are really no constraints on healthcare. Sensible reforms like forcing pricing to be more transparent, making it a lot easier for people to shop for procedures, expecting a true return when we subsidize drug development, and tort reform will go a long way towards controlling costs. And while the rich do need to pay for some level of subsidies, it is hard to argue that Obamacare as is is not an entitlement program when the phase out levels for subsidies are so high and the fines for not having insurance are so small compared to the actual cost of a meaningful health plan.
12
look, this is 100% political and has nothing to do with health care or insurance or the well being of anyone whose not a direct financial beneficiary of the republican party.
Obamacare was THEIR plan. The opposition wasn't about health care, it was about opposing EVERYTHING and anything that Obama did. The plan was to make Obama a look like a failure. Mcconnell said it straight out: the GOP would obstruct everything and the people would blame Obama. It worked !
fox news beat the drum day in and day out. all the slimy talking heads served the kool-aide and millions of people took the bait and bought into the hate. (based on FUD and ignorance)
That's how we got here.
But after seven years of outright lies, fake scandals, red herrings and meaningless theatrical "votes".. the GOP is backed against the wall. They either admit the lies or try to follow through on the "promise". That's ALL they have, is a promise; no plan,no clue, no real interest in providing health care for anyone.
dumb-as-a-stump-trump knows nothing. He has no idea what's in either the current system or the proposed one. He only says what he thinks will get him more adornment from his base.
There is only one answer and every other (civilized) country has figured it out.
But to do that means that he entire insurance industry and a good chunk of the pharma and medical industries would take a huge hit. And let's face it, the GOP ( and quite a few Dems) will never let that happen...
Obamacare was THEIR plan. The opposition wasn't about health care, it was about opposing EVERYTHING and anything that Obama did. The plan was to make Obama a look like a failure. Mcconnell said it straight out: the GOP would obstruct everything and the people would blame Obama. It worked !
fox news beat the drum day in and day out. all the slimy talking heads served the kool-aide and millions of people took the bait and bought into the hate. (based on FUD and ignorance)
That's how we got here.
But after seven years of outright lies, fake scandals, red herrings and meaningless theatrical "votes".. the GOP is backed against the wall. They either admit the lies or try to follow through on the "promise". That's ALL they have, is a promise; no plan,no clue, no real interest in providing health care for anyone.
dumb-as-a-stump-trump knows nothing. He has no idea what's in either the current system or the proposed one. He only says what he thinks will get him more adornment from his base.
There is only one answer and every other (civilized) country has figured it out.
But to do that means that he entire insurance industry and a good chunk of the pharma and medical industries would take a huge hit. And let's face it, the GOP ( and quite a few Dems) will never let that happen...
8
I'd like to suggest that everybody cheering for this and sneering at "welfare queens," needs to clear out their den or the garage or their laundry room; two-thirds of people in nursing homes are on Medicaid, and granny's gonna need a place to stay.
How you'll manage the round-the-clock nursing I've no idea, but I do want to wish you the very best of luck.
How you'll manage the round-the-clock nursing I've no idea, but I do want to wish you the very best of luck.
8
A 200 billion dollar slush fund for Republican senators to dip into if they vote for the McConnell health care travesty. Toomey points out they promised to repeal the ACA and turn Medicaid into a state program. One wonders the at infinite myopia from the rage against white decline mov't. Dunces like Mick Mulvaney have the laughably inaccurate notion that Medicaid is a damnable welfare program. And the greed is good Rs are drooling at the possibility of big undeserved tax cuts waiting to be plucked from the ACAs demise. The whole thing stinks.
7
Republican controlled Ohio cut state funding for local governments and schools to build a "rainy day" fund. Virtually all local governments had to raise taxes to cover the shortfall.
The rainy day fund simply sat there.
When additional funds were needed for road repair, the state borrowed the money, not using the rainy day fund.....
Now, with the accompanying tax cuts the state is running out of money
The rainy day fund simply sat there.
When additional funds were needed for road repair, the state borrowed the money, not using the rainy day fund.....
Now, with the accompanying tax cuts the state is running out of money
7
In the immortal words of Trump, "healthcare is hard."
The rhetoric of 8-years of the GOP beating the drum for repeal of Obamacare now have the Republicans in a politically untenable position, of their own creation. Rather than working in a bipartisan manner to improve Obamacare they chose total obstruction and obfuscation. Now let Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan and their ilk be hoist by their own petard. Totally justified, I might add.
The rhetoric of 8-years of the GOP beating the drum for repeal of Obamacare now have the Republicans in a politically untenable position, of their own creation. Rather than working in a bipartisan manner to improve Obamacare they chose total obstruction and obfuscation. Now let Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan and their ilk be hoist by their own petard. Totally justified, I might add.
17
Follow the money, Congress is too corrupt, this is why nothing gets passed, way too much outside money tainting decisions
The bill is simply a big payday for Members, period...governing is not even considered
The bill is simply a big payday for Members, period...governing is not even considered
15
I agree with the Republicans on a lot of issues, but health care isn't one of them. We really need "Medicare for everybody".
But the insurance and hospital industries, and the AMA have vested interests in keeping the current, for-profit, good for Wall Street but disastrous for Main Street, system.
The fact is that we should look at health care from a national security perspective. We have fewer doctors as a percentage of population than many third-world countries. We don't have enough medical schools and teaching hospitals. The few hospitals we have in rural areas are closing. And our for-profit system insures that we don't even have enough hospital beds for day-to-day operations, much less a minor disaster. In the case of a major disaster, like a major earthquake, an eruption in Yellowstone, or a major epidemic, we would be so unprepared that it would be like spitting in the ocean.
But the insurance and hospital industries, and the AMA have vested interests in keeping the current, for-profit, good for Wall Street but disastrous for Main Street, system.
The fact is that we should look at health care from a national security perspective. We have fewer doctors as a percentage of population than many third-world countries. We don't have enough medical schools and teaching hospitals. The few hospitals we have in rural areas are closing. And our for-profit system insures that we don't even have enough hospital beds for day-to-day operations, much less a minor disaster. In the case of a major disaster, like a major earthquake, an eruption in Yellowstone, or a major epidemic, we would be so unprepared that it would be like spitting in the ocean.
10
Late announcements and surprises do not change the picture: Hundreds of billions of dollars in cuts to medical care for middle class and impoverished Americans, freeing up hundreds of billions of dollars in tax breaks for the extremely wealthy.
6
What an amazing, convoluted and disingenuous mess.
Seven years of endless carping, vitriol and threats about killing the ACA and this is the best the Republicans can do.
So far this so called reform looks a shambles.
This is about people’s health and life and death issues. Not sure we can sink any lower.
Seven years of endless carping, vitriol and threats about killing the ACA and this is the best the Republicans can do.
So far this so called reform looks a shambles.
This is about people’s health and life and death issues. Not sure we can sink any lower.
5
So we've gone from Obamacare to Trumpcare to the newest Republican version "I don't care."
11
The bill is really about a massive tax cut and redistribution of wealth to the richest citizens, while Republicans kick the poor to the curb. Their philosophy is simple - if you can't afford healthcare you don't deserve it.
10
National healthcare for all must be for all including the Congress, Senate all the way down to every day Americans. If you can afford more coverage it should come at an extremely high extra cost. If we don't implement this type of cost to the wealthy we will get a new type class inequality and be in the same position as we are in now. If you can't afford extra coverage under this senerio you will not be made to face low guality care again.
4
Why should peons be healthy?
5
Now that the GOP has the majority in all branches of government, they are showing their true colors. No longer can they do symbolic acts like ending Obamacare knowing that it won't get signed by the
President. And guess what, they are a heartless bunch when governing. And they won't govern for all of us,just for their donors. Suprise,suprise.
Trouble is, all the Fox News Republicans still think
they can take the same irresponsible, immature attitudes that they've shown when they didn't have full responsibility, even when their actions now will hurt themselves or their neighbors, and a great number of other Americans.
Maybe, it's time for the GOP to grow up and take an adult attitude with their new found power but I doubt it. Their ManChild, the Plastic President sure isn't going to as he makes a sand box out of the most powerful position in the world.
The only thing to do is for the fringe voters near the middle of the right to now take a sober look at who your voting for. Sad to say, but you're going to have to jump ship and vote for another party that will govern with a steady hand and keep you in mind with their actions. The GOP is not the party they were in the past. They are a danger to our democracy and to you.
President. And guess what, they are a heartless bunch when governing. And they won't govern for all of us,just for their donors. Suprise,suprise.
Trouble is, all the Fox News Republicans still think
they can take the same irresponsible, immature attitudes that they've shown when they didn't have full responsibility, even when their actions now will hurt themselves or their neighbors, and a great number of other Americans.
Maybe, it's time for the GOP to grow up and take an adult attitude with their new found power but I doubt it. Their ManChild, the Plastic President sure isn't going to as he makes a sand box out of the most powerful position in the world.
The only thing to do is for the fringe voters near the middle of the right to now take a sober look at who your voting for. Sad to say, but you're going to have to jump ship and vote for another party that will govern with a steady hand and keep you in mind with their actions. The GOP is not the party they were in the past. They are a danger to our democracy and to you.
5
I believe an honest question is, why do we have these Republicans in congress, never mind the Presidency, having kept some of them in the Senate and the House way too long, if they are not smart enough to design a health care bill which would pass when they have the majority in both branches???
9
Republicans need to stop, now. They need to do the sensible thing and work with Democrats to fix the issues with the Affordable Care Act. The people whose taxes they're trying to reduce can well afford to pay them - it's the 99.8% of the country Republicans need to be concerned about.
6
Although I come from a long line of Republicans, I find that this "health" plan appeals to the baser impulses of the citizenry. It is an unhealthy country that doesn't see that our social health depends on seeing to the basic needs of our fellow Americans. And, are we not able to foresee that even if we are now healthy (and, of course we are all only temporarily healthy),there will come a day when our healthy compatriots' insurance contributions might be going toward our medical needs. The tax reduction for the wealthiest is laughable. Are we pandering to those who can buy elections, many of whom as Ann Richards and others famously said, were "born on third base"? And speaking of the wealthy, I wonder how many of our pompously paternalistic Senators (not all, but too many), who have their Cadillac health plan locked in, now hope to profit from the trashing of health care of so many of those who elected them? A securely healthy society benefits us all.
13
Why is it any surprise that Congressional Republicans want to eliminate Medicaid? They have long wanted to eliminate Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security. This is not new. The only reason they have not done so in the past is because of public pressure.
14
I keep hearing this over and over, but yet to have found a clear, traceable explanation as to why that should be their motivation?
The inexplicable facts under-girding the Republican's Better Care Act, which cynically will provide "better care" to NO ONE except America's plutocratic kleptocracy, are millions of citizens of other economically advanced nations have had access to efficacious, affordable medical and dental care for decades.
None of these other foreign health and dental care regimes are perfect, but that is where America can demonstratively assert it's oft claimed "greatness" by taking these foreign national health and dental systems and craft a U.S. single payer mechanism which incorporate the best features of these regimes while eliminating or mitigating their defects.
None of these other foreign health and dental care regimes are perfect, but that is where America can demonstratively assert it's oft claimed "greatness" by taking these foreign national health and dental systems and craft a U.S. single payer mechanism which incorporate the best features of these regimes while eliminating or mitigating their defects.
6
Matthew 25:40 (from a spiritual, not religious moderate to our Congress)
"The King will answer and say to them, 'Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.'
For heaven's sake, stop acting like you're Christians while you're doing such evil, heartless and inhumane works. It's painful to watch your hypocrisy!
"The King will answer and say to them, 'Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.'
For heaven's sake, stop acting like you're Christians while you're doing such evil, heartless and inhumane works. It's painful to watch your hypocrisy!
26
Hike the investment tax up to 20% and let's have world class healthcare for everyone in America. Happy Fourth of July!
9
I am all for single payer and an end to having to having health insurance tied to your employer. With that said, where is the honest discussion of what single payer actually will mean? How much will it cost? What services will we get as part of single payer? How many jobs, not just well paid health insurance executives, will be lost. Much of the new economy is built on healthcare jobs.
Just saying duplicate Canada or Great Britain's system means nothing given the population size of the United States. We are also used to getting, at least for the many with health insurance, whatever medical services we need. How is cancer care going to work under single payer? Will single payer be able to afford the ever increasing costs of cancer treatments?
Forget about the Republican plan and start the debate of what single payer is now so we are ready once the Republicans are back in the minority.
Just saying duplicate Canada or Great Britain's system means nothing given the population size of the United States. We are also used to getting, at least for the many with health insurance, whatever medical services we need. How is cancer care going to work under single payer? Will single payer be able to afford the ever increasing costs of cancer treatments?
Forget about the Republican plan and start the debate of what single payer is now so we are ready once the Republicans are back in the minority.
5
All versions of this bill so far are designed to reduce medical care for the poor and middle class and provide FREE medical care for the rich. Not just free medical insurance, but free out of pocket charges as well. In addition, the tax cut in most cases, it provides the money in advance of the illness!
2
Medicaid expanding under Obamacare is for the working poor. Employers and customers pay too little for their products and services. The ACA justifies the unfair practice by offering Medicaid. It is not an entitlement program. These workers pay left and right to all of us.
5
But, but, but ..... if you keep the taxes, why do you need to cut the health care?
3
Just a couple of quotes surmises the Better Care Reconciliation Act (BCRA or Trump Care)
“The BCRA is not an attempt to reform health care—rather, it's an attempt to cut health care for low-income people, sick people, and older people in order to cut taxes for the wealthy”, Thomas Huelskoetter, policy analyst for health at the Center for American Progress, a public policy research and advocacy organisation told The Lancet.
“The BCRA would not only reverse the historic coverage gains that America has made under the Affordable Care Act, but would gut the Medicaid programme which has anchored our health-care safety net for more than 50 years. There's no substitute for health coverage; on urgent health-care issues ranging from the opioid crisis to rural health access, the BCRA would set back our efforts to make progress for years to come.”
And that is from today's Lancet. This is what the respected medical journals are talking about.
“The BCRA is not an attempt to reform health care—rather, it's an attempt to cut health care for low-income people, sick people, and older people in order to cut taxes for the wealthy”, Thomas Huelskoetter, policy analyst for health at the Center for American Progress, a public policy research and advocacy organisation told The Lancet.
“The BCRA would not only reverse the historic coverage gains that America has made under the Affordable Care Act, but would gut the Medicaid programme which has anchored our health-care safety net for more than 50 years. There's no substitute for health coverage; on urgent health-care issues ranging from the opioid crisis to rural health access, the BCRA would set back our efforts to make progress for years to come.”
And that is from today's Lancet. This is what the respected medical journals are talking about.
7
I keep thinking of the health care debate is about compassion. We are one human family. We take care of each other. How we pay for this compassion is another question all together. I don’t know the answer. But I think that is the debate we should be having. We need to pay for the public good of health care, including Medicaid. Employer provided health care doesn’t work anymore. No health care for the most vulnerable among us doesn't work either. Let’s quit talking about eliminating universal health coverage. Let’s talk about compassion and how we are going to pay for it.
4
How's that repealy replacey thing workin' out for ya?
4
"35 percent decrease in projected spending".
The key word being "projected". Dear Liberals, America is on to you.
This is an INCREASE in CURRENT spending. Your words games no longer work.
Every day is Christmas with Trump in the White House. Enjoy.
The key word being "projected". Dear Liberals, America is on to you.
This is an INCREASE in CURRENT spending. Your words games no longer work.
Every day is Christmas with Trump in the White House. Enjoy.
You consider taking insurance away from 22 million people so that those costs can come down as 'Christmas'?
I do not believe that Christ could have contemplated being anywhere near so cruel to his fellow man. For the savings of just thirty pieces of silver you get a great wall of dead bodies to show for it.
And J. above is actually Proud of this?
I do not believe that Christ could have contemplated being anywhere near so cruel to his fellow man. For the savings of just thirty pieces of silver you get a great wall of dead bodies to show for it.
And J. above is actually Proud of this?
1
Slow down the GROWTH of Medicare??? Outrageous squeal the pundits. We would all prefer to just push the pedal to the floor as the fiscal trainwreck to be heads towards the cliff!
And they say Trump wants to smash things up! Well he's a piker compared to the established outrage constituency.
There is literally no one in Washington that doesn't know we are heading for insolvency, and speeding up as we go, merrily, along and yet even the most benign changes to the trajectory are met with cries of "millions will die!" as the execrable Ms Warren insists. We are all toast. Better get your self, personally, situated as it isn't going to be pretty when the ultimate denouement arrives.
And they say Trump wants to smash things up! Well he's a piker compared to the established outrage constituency.
There is literally no one in Washington that doesn't know we are heading for insolvency, and speeding up as we go, merrily, along and yet even the most benign changes to the trajectory are met with cries of "millions will die!" as the execrable Ms Warren insists. We are all toast. Better get your self, personally, situated as it isn't going to be pretty when the ultimate denouement arrives.
And where are low income ppl going to find the $ to put into tax-free savings accounts! Will right-wingers pre-fund these accounts?
How about just keeping O's plan and renaming it T's plan. Most ppl in the US would never notice.
How about just keeping O's plan and renaming it T's plan. Most ppl in the US would never notice.
"“We pledged that we would repeal Obamacare. I don’t remember anybody going around saying, ‘Oh, except for these job-killing tax increases,’” Senator Patrick J. Toomey, Republican of Pennsylvania, said of the talk of leaving the investment tax increase in place. “So I expect that we’ll be repealing all of the taxes in Obamacare.”"
This is exactly what is troubling for most of us Senator Toomey your pledge and last 7 years of talking about it. You are not concerned about the Healthcare of most of Pennsylvanians either, you are only concerned about giving the money to the super rich by taking the money from the Medicaid recipients, senior citizens, and old folks at the Nursing homes. I remember you talking about death panels when ACA was debated, but you actually are going to kill our most vulnerable folks, our grandparents too who cannot afford your privatized medications/healthcare? Shame on you sir.
Sometimes we need to understand and accept our folly of just complaining like a toddler without thinking of the consequences of our actions and accept the verdict form the adults. Just fix/tweak ACA and move on to the next priority of helping Americans. There is a lot of work that needs to be done.
This is exactly what is troubling for most of us Senator Toomey your pledge and last 7 years of talking about it. You are not concerned about the Healthcare of most of Pennsylvanians either, you are only concerned about giving the money to the super rich by taking the money from the Medicaid recipients, senior citizens, and old folks at the Nursing homes. I remember you talking about death panels when ACA was debated, but you actually are going to kill our most vulnerable folks, our grandparents too who cannot afford your privatized medications/healthcare? Shame on you sir.
Sometimes we need to understand and accept our folly of just complaining like a toddler without thinking of the consequences of our actions and accept the verdict form the adults. Just fix/tweak ACA and move on to the next priority of helping Americans. There is a lot of work that needs to be done.
2
My mother, who lived to be 98, had to go on Medicaid to pay for her nursing home. Without it, I don't know we could have cared for her. She was so fragile, so weak, couldn't walk, couldn't feed herself. Like an infant. Yet, she still loved to have visitors hold her hand and talk to her. Unlike the horror stories of nursing home care, my mother received kind, loving and gentle care from her nurses and aides. She couldn't believe there was a government program that would pay for her care, and she was so grateful for Medicaid. Republicans who are so eager to cut Medicaid should visit some nursing homes and talk to residents like my mother that depend on the program. It might help them realize the very human cost of the decisions they make.
4
Rather than a $45B treatment fund, how about having the pharmaceutical companies who are found culpable for the epidemic pay for the treatment. Quit putting business mistakes on the backs of the taxpayer.
And while we're at it, have the climate deniers pay for ecological devastation if it turns out the climate change science really is right.
Take / assign responsibility. Put up or shut up.
And while we're at it, have the climate deniers pay for ecological devastation if it turns out the climate change science really is right.
Take / assign responsibility. Put up or shut up.
2
Republicans have admitted at this point that the ACA works to help tens of millions of middle-class and poor Americans (although most of us understand that the law is flawed, and single-payer would be better.)
Why can't they work with Democrats to improve the ACA, rather than sabotaging and undermining it at every turn, as any sensible group of people would do?
Because for them, this is all about a tax cut for the wealthy. Health care for actual human beings is none of their concern.
Why can't they work with Democrats to improve the ACA, rather than sabotaging and undermining it at every turn, as any sensible group of people would do?
Because for them, this is all about a tax cut for the wealthy. Health care for actual human beings is none of their concern.
2
Don't forget that Paul Ryan said that Obamacare is the law of the land after loosing first attempt of passing Trumpcare in the House. Then after couple of weeks of arms twisting and internal negotiations among Republican members, Ryan came back and passed the unpopular bill in the House. Do not underestimate McConnell. He is shrewd and crude man and billions of dollars can be bribed to the senators. After recess he will come back and will pass this cruel unpopular bill.
2
It's easy enough to throw stones at these insane policies and the corruption in the White House. The Greater Failure by far is the failure to propose a realistic alternative to resolve the shortcomings of the ACA in a viable manner and to describe what converting to a single payer system would actually mean? That is the real power of the lobbyists...to smother that discussion in easy and calculated finger-pointing.
Shame on the national broadcast media, shame on the print media, shame on the Democrats, and shame on Americans for accepting such triviality.
Shame on the national broadcast media, shame on the print media, shame on the Democrats, and shame on Americans for accepting such triviality.
1
If suffering from confusion, repeat this phrase: "It's not a healthcare bill, it's a tax cut for the wealthy."
Repeat as needed if symptoms persist.
Repeat as needed if symptoms persist.
5
"“We pledged that we would repeal Obamacare."...
Oh get over yourselves!!! Make something that actually works for all Americans, not just your gerrymandered districts. You're not the Tooth Fairy, you're Senators. Do the hard and REAL work. This bill is not serious and not sustainable.
Adults admit when they were wrong, and you were wrong and short-sighted to promise repeal. Admit it was pretty much all political theater and GET ON WITH IT. Personally I only see single-payer, but I would be willing to hear a serious conversation about other options, even I if I disagree with it. I am hearing nothing but theological attachment to things that will not work. Reagan is OVER. Think for yourselves.
Oh get over yourselves!!! Make something that actually works for all Americans, not just your gerrymandered districts. You're not the Tooth Fairy, you're Senators. Do the hard and REAL work. This bill is not serious and not sustainable.
Adults admit when they were wrong, and you were wrong and short-sighted to promise repeal. Admit it was pretty much all political theater and GET ON WITH IT. Personally I only see single-payer, but I would be willing to hear a serious conversation about other options, even I if I disagree with it. I am hearing nothing but theological attachment to things that will not work. Reagan is OVER. Think for yourselves.
76
If you get free food, free money, free rent, free cell phone, and now free health care, why would anyone work?
Republicans should just end the mandate,that someone not needing or wanting insurance,is forced to buy it.Then don't subsidize states that promote excess welfare for votes,like California.Forget about Medicaid cuts,since it's unlikely Republicans are going to control Congress and White House until 2026.That should be enough to assure Obamacare's collapse,without promising Medicaid cuts far in the future.As far as the rich ATM.Like the Beatles "Taxman" song goes,they should be thankful they don't take it all.The rich have ways of avoiding many taxes and I'm sure they will work on this one.
1
And let's get rid of car insurance for people who don't want it !!
3
The GOP plan would increase the cost of LIVING in good health for all who earn less than US median income- more than half of the country. None in that group will be able to afford to "choose" an insurance plan that is BEST for them: They will go without, or opt for catastrophic coverage, and avoid medical care until they are too sick to avoid it. Their neighbors may hold fundraising events to pay for cancer care, or use GoFundMe.
Funding opioid treatment for those who have no coverage for other health issues is a triumph of sensationalism over sanity. Drug centers will pop up; but patients won't be able to access, e.g., chronic care for diabetes, or treatment for injuries.
It's NOT the 1800s - pioneers toughed everything out because there were few to none medical options. Most of us- outside the House and Senate- believe that all are entitled to care that can cure or remedy disease. The sane way to do this is through universal - mandated -coverage.
I won't call it "single payer" - it's going to be more complex: it's a mistake when either side oversimplifies medical care/coverage reform - a problem for the ACA rollout. A massive structure has grown to maximize returns from the current non-system: it has to be dismantled.
There is also no way to look at this bill, or problems in sustaining Medicare and Social Security, without reference to funding sources. People outside of the top 30-20% of income cannot afford inflated costs in insurance rates and medical costs.
Funding opioid treatment for those who have no coverage for other health issues is a triumph of sensationalism over sanity. Drug centers will pop up; but patients won't be able to access, e.g., chronic care for diabetes, or treatment for injuries.
It's NOT the 1800s - pioneers toughed everything out because there were few to none medical options. Most of us- outside the House and Senate- believe that all are entitled to care that can cure or remedy disease. The sane way to do this is through universal - mandated -coverage.
I won't call it "single payer" - it's going to be more complex: it's a mistake when either side oversimplifies medical care/coverage reform - a problem for the ACA rollout. A massive structure has grown to maximize returns from the current non-system: it has to be dismantled.
There is also no way to look at this bill, or problems in sustaining Medicare and Social Security, without reference to funding sources. People outside of the top 30-20% of income cannot afford inflated costs in insurance rates and medical costs.
15
Forty nine percent of the population has employer provided health insurance [down from 59% in 2010] 18% have Medicare, 20% have Medicaid, 3% have ObamaCare policies and 10% are uninsured.
The poorest in the country have Medicaid. The gloom and doom you are railing at involves fewer than 3% of the population, most of whom are above the poverty level.
Hyperbole is not convincing. You claim everyone under the median income will be worse off when in fact everyone under the median income and under age 45 is far better off. Wealthy early retirees will have to pay the full actuarial cost of their health insurance less $4,000. Sounds fairer than ObamaCare's rule that the wealthiest should get the biggest subsidies.
Half of the population earns below the medium income, by definition. Not all of the 3% covered by ObamaCare policies are below medium income. In fact, most are above median income. Less than half of the 3%, or less than 1.5% of the population MIGHT have to pay more for their health insurance under the Republican plan than under ObamaCare. Average premiums are going to decline 20%. The decline for those under age 45 will decline 40-50%.
The poorest in the country have Medicaid. The gloom and doom you are railing at involves fewer than 3% of the population, most of whom are above the poverty level.
Hyperbole is not convincing. You claim everyone under the median income will be worse off when in fact everyone under the median income and under age 45 is far better off. Wealthy early retirees will have to pay the full actuarial cost of their health insurance less $4,000. Sounds fairer than ObamaCare's rule that the wealthiest should get the biggest subsidies.
Half of the population earns below the medium income, by definition. Not all of the 3% covered by ObamaCare policies are below medium income. In fact, most are above median income. Less than half of the 3%, or less than 1.5% of the population MIGHT have to pay more for their health insurance under the Republican plan than under ObamaCare. Average premiums are going to decline 20%. The decline for those under age 45 will decline 40-50%.
The Republican Party may be doing more to promote the adoption of universal healthcare in America than almost any other group in the country. The Republican Party is uniquely positioned to finally bring universal healthcare to the masses of American citizens. They may just do it this time.
25
The GOP strategy is crystal clear. Legislate in favor or your biggest and best donors at the expense of the ill informed ( read as ignorant and/or stupid) voters who swoon when policy matters take the headlines away from the raw meat of scapegoating, racism and other forms of bigotry against women and minorities.
As 100% of political scientists will agree, " the greatest threat to a representative democracy is an ignorant electorate." And now we have the man in the White House that the founders feared.
As 100% of political scientists will agree, " the greatest threat to a representative democracy is an ignorant electorate." And now we have the man in the White House that the founders feared.
21
...and don't forget a sufficient population of UNwashed, UNlettered Deplorables clutching their guns, their bibles and their Confederate Flags all chanting "Lock Her Up".....and all voting for a man that they see as"just like themselves".....loud, boorish and "completely normal"
The greatest threat to democracy is an autocratic elite who decide what is best for the peasants. They start out as benevolent dictators. But they rapidly decide that what is good enough for the "voters" is not good enough for them.
One of the very few Republican amendments that made it into the law was the provision that the members of Congress and their staff were no longer eligible for employer provided health insurance. They would be obligated to buy in the individual exchanges and would be eligible for subsidies only if their income was below four times the poverty rate.
The law was offensive to the ruling elite. Obama decreed that the federal government was a small employer, and that Congress and their staffs were entitled to have their small employer subsidize 80% of their premiums, regardless of their income level. What is unfortunate is that had the law been executed as written, Democrats would have joined forces with the Republicans to modify its hideousness.
As with his other imperial diktats, Obama and his administrative state was the greatest threat to democracy in America.
The ignorant electorate was smart enough to detect that the rulers were looking to skim off benefits for themselves, despite their high minded narrative.
You cannot point to a single dictatorial act of Trump. All of the judicial rulings against him are going to be overturned. [Obama had more SCOTUS slap downs than any predecessor other than FDR.]
One of the very few Republican amendments that made it into the law was the provision that the members of Congress and their staff were no longer eligible for employer provided health insurance. They would be obligated to buy in the individual exchanges and would be eligible for subsidies only if their income was below four times the poverty rate.
The law was offensive to the ruling elite. Obama decreed that the federal government was a small employer, and that Congress and their staffs were entitled to have their small employer subsidize 80% of their premiums, regardless of their income level. What is unfortunate is that had the law been executed as written, Democrats would have joined forces with the Republicans to modify its hideousness.
As with his other imperial diktats, Obama and his administrative state was the greatest threat to democracy in America.
The ignorant electorate was smart enough to detect that the rulers were looking to skim off benefits for themselves, despite their high minded narrative.
You cannot point to a single dictatorial act of Trump. All of the judicial rulings against him are going to be overturned. [Obama had more SCOTUS slap downs than any predecessor other than FDR.]
Well, the providers will just have to be more efficient and charge less.
Isn't that the GOP's approach to everything except cutting taxes for the wealthy?
Isn't that the GOP's approach to everything except cutting taxes for the wealthy?
11
Twenty years from now, having shifted as much national wealth as possible to their friends and themselves, the republicans will settle into their strongholds like banana republic dictators. The inevitable democratic wave will wash over republican strongholds like the rising waters of global warming will creep into Miami's gated communities and golf courses. Most of the current players will have gone to their celestial rewards (or not); and the democrats will be left holding the bill. The problems will still be here; but republicans won't have to solve them. The republican base will still be here, like Southern Civil War monuments. Things don't change all that fast if you tweak things just right. It will be up to the scions to perpetuate the legacy, just as the legacy of racism is perpetuated today. We know the MO.
14
Very perceptive.
Civil Servants are not giving up their platinum employer provided health insurance in exchange for Medicaid for all. Dream on.
Health savings accounts really don't make any sense to me. If you could afford to adequately save for health care costs, you should be able to afford comprehensive insurance. You therefore shouldn't really need the health savings accounts. Pre-funded accounts to go buy insurance make a bit more sense but why make the consumer another intermediary? I don't feel qualified to gamble my savings account on which illness I might contract in the future. I'd have to call insurance company and ask them what I should buy. They obviously won't tell you about any loop holes or omissions in their recommended plan. What kind of choice is that? You're just creating inefficiency while sacrificing the security of the citizen.
19
Ahh...you DO understand the basis of capitalism....
"Confusion in the buyers mind = Profits in the sellers purse"
"Confusion in the buyers mind = Profits in the sellers purse"
HSAs are not a perfect solution for everyone, and they are not an instant solution, because you need to have some time to build up some savings.
In a given year, in an actuarially sound insurance system, 90% of health insurance premiums are spent on 10% of the population that is having a bad year. What ObamaCare offered to healthy 25 year olds was a $250/month premium with a $2500 deductible, when the expected cost of their care was $800. So they paid $3,000 in premiums and still wound up paying most of their $800 of actual need in order to meet their deductible.
An actuarially sound, equitable insurance scheme would have charged them $50/month for insurance with a $2500 deductible. They would have had the option of putting another $100+ per month into their HSA. For 90% of the population, the $1200 they put in their HSA covers their $800 in annual costs with $400 remaining in the HSA, plus interest. Or they can let the HSA ride and pay the $800 out-of-pocket from the other $1200 they are saving because they are paying $50/month in premiums instead of $250.
Over a period of years, they occasionally dip into their HSA when they have high medical costs. They also increase their deductibles as the HSA grows and thereby reduce their premiums from $450/month to $350 at age 45 and put the extra into the HSA. At 55, they have $50-$500k saved up to cover their higher costs.
It doesn't work for people on the edge of poverty, but Medicaid is there for them.
In a given year, in an actuarially sound insurance system, 90% of health insurance premiums are spent on 10% of the population that is having a bad year. What ObamaCare offered to healthy 25 year olds was a $250/month premium with a $2500 deductible, when the expected cost of their care was $800. So they paid $3,000 in premiums and still wound up paying most of their $800 of actual need in order to meet their deductible.
An actuarially sound, equitable insurance scheme would have charged them $50/month for insurance with a $2500 deductible. They would have had the option of putting another $100+ per month into their HSA. For 90% of the population, the $1200 they put in their HSA covers their $800 in annual costs with $400 remaining in the HSA, plus interest. Or they can let the HSA ride and pay the $800 out-of-pocket from the other $1200 they are saving because they are paying $50/month in premiums instead of $250.
Over a period of years, they occasionally dip into their HSA when they have high medical costs. They also increase their deductibles as the HSA grows and thereby reduce their premiums from $450/month to $350 at age 45 and put the extra into the HSA. At 55, they have $50-$500k saved up to cover their higher costs.
It doesn't work for people on the edge of poverty, but Medicaid is there for them.
Republicans:
If the numbers
don't add up
Just lie
like trump
is trying
to teach
you to
do!
If the numbers
don't add up
Just lie
like trump
is trying
to teach
you to
do!
4
The Republicans believe that being poor is a personal choice.
On that basis they do not believe in social programs to help the poor as they believe those programs enable the poor to stay poor
In their mind they are ok with cutting social programs causing folks to even die
On that basis they do not believe in social programs to help the poor as they believe those programs enable the poor to stay poor
In their mind they are ok with cutting social programs causing folks to even die
8
Yes, it was my choice to be born in 1958. It was my choice to be laid off any number of times, to live through extended periods of unemployment even as I looked high and low for a job, any job. It was my decision to be born female so I could be underpaid and discriminated against and not mentored. Just like my brother decided to be autistic I decided to get older.
However, unlike McConnell and Ryan, I did not have polio and my father didn't die when I was young. And I would not vote in favor of eliminating programs that had helped me just as I don't object to paying taxes for Social Security or on gas because I do understand the fact that paying taxes helps to keep a country running. Of course in America we now have a president who thinks it's smart not to pay taxes and a GOP majority that views 99% of us as expendable. But that's their choice. Ours is whether we vote them back in or not. I say not because people who value us wouldn't treat us this way.
However, unlike McConnell and Ryan, I did not have polio and my father didn't die when I was young. And I would not vote in favor of eliminating programs that had helped me just as I don't object to paying taxes for Social Security or on gas because I do understand the fact that paying taxes helps to keep a country running. Of course in America we now have a president who thinks it's smart not to pay taxes and a GOP majority that views 99% of us as expendable. But that's their choice. Ours is whether we vote them back in or not. I say not because people who value us wouldn't treat us this way.
26
People who complain about Medicaid and want to cut it are perplexing to say the least.
Do you want to send the grannies who can't swallow back to the salt mines from their nursing homes and just have no prenatal care whatsoever?
There are ways to fix it and make healthcare cheaper across the board without murdering the most vulnerable of our population.
Or sounding like you would just send a 3 year old to work in a defunct coal mine for 5 cents a week in company scrip and all the black lung no one will treat.
Do you want to send the grannies who can't swallow back to the salt mines from their nursing homes and just have no prenatal care whatsoever?
There are ways to fix it and make healthcare cheaper across the board without murdering the most vulnerable of our population.
Or sounding like you would just send a 3 year old to work in a defunct coal mine for 5 cents a week in company scrip and all the black lung no one will treat.
5
The basic problem here is that to get elected you have to pander to special interests. So, the republicans cannot just reform Obamacare to make it better. How can anyone argue that insurance companies cannot offer plans anywhere? Special interests. How can anyone argue that we have enough doctors when it take 2 weeks to get a "routine" appointment? Special interests. I keep hearing that single payer is "too expensive" but then you have to ask- How does France do it? I'd be looking at every other country to learn from them. Why aren't our legislators doing that? Special interests. It's probably true that Ted Cruz thinks that poor people are just free loaders. It's also probably true that Bernie Sanders has no idea what a single payer system would cost without controls. Sure but the majority of these creeps just vote the way their big donors tell them to vote. Oh, it's not illegal pay to play. It's just unethical pay to influence.
9
So,representatives aren't supposed to represent their constituents?
3
As Buffet said, it's the people in Congress themselves who benefit, not just their donors. This is simply greedy representatives and Senators voting themselves the tax cut of all time. These people themselves are for the most part very very wealthy.
1
So you believe only multi-million dollar-donors are the real constituents?
There's there's nothing wrong with Medicaid that could not be fixed with a 90 percent wealth tax on billionaires -- all of whom, by definitions are arrogant, brutal thieves.
4
Why not a 100%?I'm sure they would be OK working for free,especially if they are supporting some massive welfare program.And anyway,what right do they have to their earnings?I mean,where's their heart?
1
Extremists on all sides are so much fun!
It's about time to consider outsourcing the design of the American healthcare system. The Canadian or British parliament might be willing to do it. Even if they charged an exorbitant amount for the service, it would be worth it.
9
Providing healthcare and nursing home care for millions of Americans is money well spent. We bear the burden of paying taxes for it on a progressive scale and have so many benefit as a result, making us all better as a society. To me, that is the purpose of good governance. It is not "getting out of the way" so the wealthy can cling to their yachts and summer homes while the vast majority try to make ends meet.
13
And for some of the very wealthy those taxes will not make a dent in their ability to buy whatever they want. What our politicians are missing is that most of us understand that we will not be multimillionaires. We understand the value of work, of being self supporting, of being able to provide for our families. But we also know that there are times when help is needed and when a person needs ongoing medical care to survive, whether it's for heart disease or cancer denying them access is foolish. It's even more foolish if it's an illness like Ebola, typhus, AIDS, tuberculosis or worse.
No one should have to go without glasses because they can't afford to see an optometrist or pay for the prescription. No child or adult should go without dental care. All of us ought to be able to live in decent affordable housing. Yet every time decisions about our well being need to be made the GOP goes to the punitive ones, the ones that will eventually destroy us. It's time Americans woke up to the fact that pulling oneself up by ones bootstraps is an unrealistic and unhealthy fantasy. We're living in the 21st century, not the 18th where we could barter and where there was more of a community than there is now.
On the other hand, if we want people dying in the streets by the thousands, what the GOP is doing is perfect. So we get to take our pick because in the end we are the ones who put these folks in office. We get what we vote for.
No one should have to go without glasses because they can't afford to see an optometrist or pay for the prescription. No child or adult should go without dental care. All of us ought to be able to live in decent affordable housing. Yet every time decisions about our well being need to be made the GOP goes to the punitive ones, the ones that will eventually destroy us. It's time Americans woke up to the fact that pulling oneself up by ones bootstraps is an unrealistic and unhealthy fantasy. We're living in the 21st century, not the 18th where we could barter and where there was more of a community than there is now.
On the other hand, if we want people dying in the streets by the thousands, what the GOP is doing is perfect. So we get to take our pick because in the end we are the ones who put these folks in office. We get what we vote for.
7
The appropriate government approach to reducing Medicaid is to reduce poverty.
Republican congressional representatives maintain the fiction that poverty is caused by the hammock supported by the Democrats. But, Why do a minority of children born into the lowest economic quintile rise into higher quintiles and why do a majority of children born into the highest economic quintile rarely fall out of it?
Republican congressional representatives maintain the fiction that poverty is caused by the hammock supported by the Democrats. But, Why do a minority of children born into the lowest economic quintile rise into higher quintiles and why do a majority of children born into the highest economic quintile rarely fall out of it?
1
Of the many unanswered questions about the House or Senate plan, one glaring one is, "Who will pay for the UNinsured who get into a car accident or have a heart attack or asthma attack?" Our Federal laws still properly require emergency rooms to provide care without regard to insurance or the ability to pay.
Likewise will our uninsured use the Emergency Room for primary and preventive care that can be better and less expensively handled in an office?
I would hope that the CBO score reflects this important metric. Local taxes and insurance premiums will rise. Yet, the GOP can boast about the "Repeal and Replace" while the rest of us divert local taxes for badly needed improvements in infrastructure and education.
Likewise will our uninsured use the Emergency Room for primary and preventive care that can be better and less expensively handled in an office?
I would hope that the CBO score reflects this important metric. Local taxes and insurance premiums will rise. Yet, the GOP can boast about the "Repeal and Replace" while the rest of us divert local taxes for badly needed improvements in infrastructure and education.
3
There have been some reports that McConnell was going to seek some bipartisan input. Another report is that the tax breaks for the wealthy were out. The big problem is medicaid. This is a program for the neediest and it works. Nothing that includes reduction in Medicaid will pass. But if he could work with a few Democrats to help, he could dump the likes of Cruz and Paul If anything, Medicaid should be expanded. Insurance premiums may go down but the older patients will have a significant increase in their deductibles. Hr should leave the rate as it is now. The bill should stay away from abortion. We already have a law regarding federal funds for abortion. A NYT article pointed out some of the good parts of the bill but but unless McConnell gets rid of the offencive parts, the bill is doomed. It will also set the stage for a failed tax reform effort bill.
4
Seven years to craft a better health insurance plan than the ACA. The GOP voted to repeal the ACA more than 50 times!
Now with control of Congress and the White House their plan?
Hatched in secrecy in the basement of the Capitol both the House and Senate versions callously concocted a tax cut for billionaires that will, if enacted, deprive 20+million Americans of vital health care and directly cause more deaths and unnecessary disability than the 9/11 hijackers.
Let me state the problem before Congress:
Every person in America needs health insurance to provide care for themselves and their families when they need it.
Every person in America needs health insurance to pay for this care throughout their lifetimes.
Every person in America needs to be protected against financial bankruptcy caused by healthcare needs.
Every person in America needs to take their prescribed medicines to maintain and optimize their health.
Maternal healthcare plays an important role in the health of mothers, children, and families. Do not create barriers for women who seek the healthcare they need.
Business has failed to meet this need.
Businesses should not be in the business of determining what healthcare their employees will need.
Businesses should be freed from providing healthcare insurance.
Someone must pay for healthcare insurance.
The Solution:
Universal Health Insurance.
Everyone pays. Everyone is covered. Everyone wins.
Now with control of Congress and the White House their plan?
Hatched in secrecy in the basement of the Capitol both the House and Senate versions callously concocted a tax cut for billionaires that will, if enacted, deprive 20+million Americans of vital health care and directly cause more deaths and unnecessary disability than the 9/11 hijackers.
Let me state the problem before Congress:
Every person in America needs health insurance to provide care for themselves and their families when they need it.
Every person in America needs health insurance to pay for this care throughout their lifetimes.
Every person in America needs to be protected against financial bankruptcy caused by healthcare needs.
Every person in America needs to take their prescribed medicines to maintain and optimize their health.
Maternal healthcare plays an important role in the health of mothers, children, and families. Do not create barriers for women who seek the healthcare they need.
Business has failed to meet this need.
Businesses should not be in the business of determining what healthcare their employees will need.
Businesses should be freed from providing healthcare insurance.
Someone must pay for healthcare insurance.
The Solution:
Universal Health Insurance.
Everyone pays. Everyone is covered. Everyone wins.
21
Amen! Indeed!
I wish all health care providers were required to post the prices for their services publicly and in an easy-to-access, easy-to-compare way. It's ridiculous that when one goes to a doctor, they recommend a treatment and you ask how much it will cost, they have no idea. Given the way the system is currently structured, it's not the doctor's fault, but there needs to be greater transparency for consumers in the health care industry. Without it, how can you expect people to be able to make smart, informed decisions?
7
I had to wade through many crazy comments to finally find a rational one.Thanks,
wonder why we don't hear about how medicaid subsidizes businesses who don't pay health care for their minimum wage workers who can't afford healthcare without medicaid or it's expansion. Those who work long hours in fast food or in a Walmart type store for example are not "lazy slackers" as some Conservatives believe but people who don't have a healthcare option from their employer but can't afford to buy insurance without spending half of their salary on it. What about rent, food and utilities?
9
Repeal and Replace the Republicans in Congress...
11
All of the gyrations and the difficulties of coming up with an acceptable bill, stem from the 7 year practice of trash-talking Obamacare and vowing to repeal it. They've spent so much energy, and promised their constituents so many times, that they can't comfortably go back on it.
They had failed to recognize that there is a lot of good in ACA and that it eased some of the problems in our health care system. They refused to negotiate with Obama 7 years ago, or since then, to address any legitimate concerns or improve on ACA.
Now they're stuck in the corner into which they've painted themselves; can't repeal (or even partially repeal or replace) without making things worse for many Americans, but can't do nothing without admitting they were wrong and looking foolish to their constituents. The reality is that their promises to repeal were just anti-Obama arguments instead of well thought out policy, and that there isn't a viable way to do what they promised without causing a lot of harm.
Perhaps they should have learned from their past over-promises, like "Read my lips, no new taxes!" or "Trickle Down Theory". Those who don't learn from their own history, are doomed to repeat.
They had failed to recognize that there is a lot of good in ACA and that it eased some of the problems in our health care system. They refused to negotiate with Obama 7 years ago, or since then, to address any legitimate concerns or improve on ACA.
Now they're stuck in the corner into which they've painted themselves; can't repeal (or even partially repeal or replace) without making things worse for many Americans, but can't do nothing without admitting they were wrong and looking foolish to their constituents. The reality is that their promises to repeal were just anti-Obama arguments instead of well thought out policy, and that there isn't a viable way to do what they promised without causing a lot of harm.
Perhaps they should have learned from their past over-promises, like "Read my lips, no new taxes!" or "Trickle Down Theory". Those who don't learn from their own history, are doomed to repeat.
9
You have to lift up every cave stone to expose these vulgar Republican creatures from their dens! The true Republican colours have already been exposed in the first 100 days of trump's presidency to show what these vermin truly are.
7
Have any of these people sat down and done a budget for someone who makes the median salary in America? Obviously not because if they had they'd realize that it's impossible to save for retirement, save for a college education for one's children, pay all the bills, the rent/mortgage, and set aside money for the HSAs unless one has a rich relative and most of us don't. In fact many Americans, even those with jobs that pay well above the median, are struggling because of short sighted politicians who care more about winning and satisfying their rich donors than they do their constituents.
Instead of paying our senators and representatives salaries that are well above what most of us make, perhaps we should start petitions to lower their pay, cut their perks, and thereby force them to struggle with the same issues we're dealing with. Those issues are the threat of unemployment which grows as we age, medical bankruptcy, homelessness due to a lack of decent affordable housing, poor health because our wealth care industry cares about its economic health rather than our physical health, and so on down the line.
The entire working class in America is under siege and all the GOP can do is write bills that hurt us even more. Judas might have betrayed Christ for 30 pieces of silver but what he did is understandable. What the GOP is doing is not because they are not in danger of being executed by anyone.
Instead of paying our senators and representatives salaries that are well above what most of us make, perhaps we should start petitions to lower their pay, cut their perks, and thereby force them to struggle with the same issues we're dealing with. Those issues are the threat of unemployment which grows as we age, medical bankruptcy, homelessness due to a lack of decent affordable housing, poor health because our wealth care industry cares about its economic health rather than our physical health, and so on down the line.
The entire working class in America is under siege and all the GOP can do is write bills that hurt us even more. Judas might have betrayed Christ for 30 pieces of silver but what he did is understandable. What the GOP is doing is not because they are not in danger of being executed by anyone.
25
Is it too obvious to point out that to establish " tax-free savings accounts for medical expenses" is a non-starter for the millions who don't even enough money to meet daily expenses? How can you save what you don't have.
Republicans in their wealth simply don't seem to realize that 71% of American workers make $50,000 or less. Start with these people's needs and then produce a health bill that makes sense. Forget about the interests of insurance companies.
Republicans in their wealth simply don't seem to realize that 71% of American workers make $50,000 or less. Start with these people's needs and then produce a health bill that makes sense. Forget about the interests of insurance companies.
32
forget about the insurance companies? why they and their top officials donate large amounts of money to the politicians and political organizations? to cut them off would be un-american.
3
Give Us Singe Payer Or Give Us Death. The GOP chose death.
15
Is this why Donald is picking on women? Distract the scandal hungry public so you can do some real damage with the Death Panel Chair McConnell in charge. Sick bunch of men who are dangerous in positions that will destroy our country.
31
More evidence that today's Republicans simply despise the poor.
15
Health care is a human right. Period. That is understood in Europe. Every single person needs health care. (Heck, we have to have automobile insurance...are autos more valuable than human beings?) Everyone will need and use health insurance. The plate put in my fractured ankle last year cost $18, 000...on top of the operation, the 4 casts, multiple visits, physical therapy, etc. Luckily I have insurance. If we don't offer affordable insurance then all medical problems will end up in the emergency rooms. Senators and Congressmen with their gold plated insurance for themselves and family members are clueless about the reality for the rest of Americans. Disgusting and disgraceful!
20
i wonder if the doctors, health insurance companies, health insurance company ceo's in the countries that provide health care to all persons are as rich as those in the USA? i doubt it very much. should those persons in the USA who can not or do not wish to buy their own health care insurance be given the same health care benefits as those who pay for their own coverage?
i do not think our government(i.e. taxpayers) is buying cars or providing car insurance for poor people. i hope i am right about this.
i do not think our government(i.e. taxpayers) is buying cars or providing car insurance for poor people. i hope i am right about this.
The question is why any sentient being would vote for such a cruel bill. GOP?
12
Pretty simple really. These are rich men that want to lower their tax exposure.
3
I say let the Democrats sit back and let them do it their way completely. Don't touch it, don't try to fix it. Then these guys will have to take 100% responsibility for this arrogant show of crony capitalism on steroids.
7
"Senate Republicans bristled after an outside group tied to Mr. Trump went after one of their own for opposing the bill, Senator Dean Heller of Nevada. Adding to the insult, one of the top officials of that group, Nick Ayers, was named Vice President Mike Pence’s chief of staff on Thursday — after the blowup."
It's all right, GOPers. If you're really so worried that the monster you and your colleagues created will now eat you out of House (and Senate!) and home, you're more than welcome to leave the party that continues to betray you and your constituents.
You're also more than welcome to join us afterwards in the saner parties, away from the covfefe tweets, mean bills, and job-killing tax cuts and government-services sabotage. Let's work out a real single payer health plan for all of us, paid for and then some by substantially taxing hedge fund gamblers per trade, slashing the massive defense-contractor payouts (no more gilded toilets!), and ending wasteful corporate-welfare "charter" schools and big-business tax breaks. Together, We Can Do It!
It's all right, GOPers. If you're really so worried that the monster you and your colleagues created will now eat you out of House (and Senate!) and home, you're more than welcome to leave the party that continues to betray you and your constituents.
You're also more than welcome to join us afterwards in the saner parties, away from the covfefe tweets, mean bills, and job-killing tax cuts and government-services sabotage. Let's work out a real single payer health plan for all of us, paid for and then some by substantially taxing hedge fund gamblers per trade, slashing the massive defense-contractor payouts (no more gilded toilets!), and ending wasteful corporate-welfare "charter" schools and big-business tax breaks. Together, We Can Do It!
45 Billion for an opioid fund.
Shouldn't the drug companies that made such gross profits FROM the crisis pay for this?
Shouldn't the drug companies that made such gross profits FROM the crisis pay for this?
15
Make no mistake: this bill will pass, passing by the needs of the American public, carried through a skewed Congress, one which does not represent the will of the people. Republican Senators sneak through the night behind closed doors, squeezing through cracks in our laws, coming up drain holes. We turn on the light, they scurry away. In the light of the morning, we see what they have done. Fifty votes. That is what it will take. It will happen. These nocturnal creatures know no religion, or morality. They just exist. The CBO score matters not a bit.
10
It's a bad time to be cutting funding that may go to nursing home care, just as the boomers are moving into retirement and dealing with the issues of their own parents' wealth depletion before they get jammed into Medicaid. This is what I am hearing daily from my friends and neighbors "Dad and Mom has XXX dollars but they rain through with home nursing care that and now they have to get into a home on Medicaid" - these are not indigent poor, but people who worked and saved and then had to run through everything before the end of their life. Add those who had nothing to start and you are facing a wall of need that will be tough to scale.
18
Medicaid should be terminated.
It is way past time for the poor to go to work.
It is way past time for the poor to go to work.
1
You do know that the vast majority of people on Medicaid are children, the disabled or elderly people in nursing homes? What kind of work would you have them perform?
4
Everyone on public assistance who can work, should. But taking away healthcare is not how we help people find work. How about more job training? More affordable college? Further oversight of for-profit "colleges"? Retraining those out of work because their field is becoming obsolete (coal)? More money for public schools? Higher minimum wage?
Work can give people a sense of accomplishment and pride. To be successful at work, people need to be stable and healthy, and make enough money to live on what they earn. Could you live on minimum wage and without heath insurance??
Work can give people a sense of accomplishment and pride. To be successful at work, people need to be stable and healthy, and make enough money to live on what they earn. Could you live on minimum wage and without heath insurance??
I know you are kidding,right?
1
if we give the insurance companies the ability to duck and dive what they cover we will lose the war
2
What I don't understand is why the names Mitch and McConnell aren't being used as lightning rods in campaigns. Rich Mitch doesn't want you to have health insurance. You believed otherwise? Sorry you were McConnelled.
11
How is a tax on investment income a job-killing tax?
7
It's not. It's a scare tactic used by wealthy people to hoard equity.
2
The cost of Medicaid increased by about 15% in each of the last two years. The proposed bill is not a "cut", rather a decrease in the projected rate of spending going forward.
The state of Ohio spent 42% of its budget on Medicaid last year, and 14% on public school (K -12) education. Invests three times as much on an entitlement (that includes able-bodied persons) than on our children's future.
Now you know the kind of issues we have that make people plead "Make America Great Again". It is nothing about the oft-repeated nonsense of an fascist legacy . It is about a time when this country invested in its youth, its future, and saw anything as possible.
Now look at us...
The state of Ohio spent 42% of its budget on Medicaid last year, and 14% on public school (K -12) education. Invests three times as much on an entitlement (that includes able-bodied persons) than on our children's future.
Now you know the kind of issues we have that make people plead "Make America Great Again". It is nothing about the oft-repeated nonsense of an fascist legacy . It is about a time when this country invested in its youth, its future, and saw anything as possible.
Now look at us...
1
Perhaps you need new state level leadership. Austerity is not the friend that the Republican rhetoric makes it out to be.
It seems incredible that in a country as rich as ours, we should choose between health and education? Able-bodied poeple get sick. They get injured. Being hit by a truck is not always their fault, as you seem to imply. IF they are on medicaid it is because their employer pays them so little that they cannot afford to buy insurance. Should they die? Should they, instead of going to the Dr. with the flue, show up in the ER (which would be their only choice) and drive up hospital costs? I wish those screaming 'Make America Great Again' had some comprehension of the whole picture, rather than wagging self-righteous fingers at their neighbors and settling for simple platitudes instead of real solutions.
3
Fewer people are covered. That's a cut.
And of course, you aren't suggesting Ohio use savings from not paying for kids' medical care to pay for kids' education. If you did, someone would say "why not both", and then we'd get some song and dance about how health and education won't make America great again but a Wall will.
And of course, you aren't suggesting Ohio use savings from not paying for kids' medical care to pay for kids' education. If you did, someone would say "why not both", and then we'd get some song and dance about how health and education won't make America great again but a Wall will.
In 2009 an important goal of reforming health care was to bring all Americans into a system of health care by requiring everyone to be insured. Only then we would know the true cost of health care. Thus informed we could identify the areas of inefficiency and waste with greater certainty and we could design policy and market reforms to address those deficiencies. The ACA failed to cover everyone in large part because some states, primarily for political reasons, did not expand medicaid. But ACA got far enough to expose deficiencies in how we spend on health care, how we manage health care and how we provide, or more accurately deny, access to health care. There is plenty of room for improvement. Thus far though Republican proposals to replace the ACA have not identified one thing on a long list that could truly contain cost while maintaining and improving care. Instead they propose to return to the days of hear no evil, see no evil policies that shifted costs instead of addressing them, that left the least able to pay least cared for and that insured those who worked hardest for the least would sufferer the most. Bravo Mr. McConnell.
11
I want everyone who's sick to be able to get medical care but I don't want my grandchildren to have to pay for people who were sick before my grandchildren were born. Being fair to both sick people and to the grandkids isn't a problem slogans will solve.
The Death Care Bill. Let us call it what it is.
4
The way to minimize the risk of healthy people buying low cost-low benefit insurance plans is single payer medicare for all.
Twist the facts and numbers any way you want. Twenty percent of healthcare goes to insurance CEOs, administrative costs, stockholders, etc. There is an incentive to inflate costs. As long as there is a profit to be made off of the sick there will be no control of healthcare costs.
Twist the facts and numbers any way you want. Twenty percent of healthcare goes to insurance CEOs, administrative costs, stockholders, etc. There is an incentive to inflate costs. As long as there is a profit to be made off of the sick there will be no control of healthcare costs.
9
A projection of a 35% "drop" in spending over 30 years?
Of course the Times does not explain that the "drop" is not really a drop but the "decrease in the increase".
It's the difference between the increase in spending that is projected with the current plan vs. the 35% less increase under the new plan. These type of 20 year projections are so worthless in so many ways, but the real issue again is that Medicaid is a failed plan, and the current growth of it set in motion by Obamacare is totally unsustainable. It provides "insurance" but does terribly in measures of improved health. Of course no one in the Government (neither party) is interested in improved health, they just want to spin numbers about how many are on insurance. No matter that most Obamacare plans have $6,000 deductibles that the people covered by those plans can't pay. Or that Medicaid patients in most areas cannot find a Doctors office that even accepts their plan. Ever wonder why you never hear anything about health statistics after 8 years of Obamacare?? That's because there is absolutely no change or improvement in the general health of the US population, based on accepted statistical measures. It's all a sham.
Of course the Times does not explain that the "drop" is not really a drop but the "decrease in the increase".
It's the difference between the increase in spending that is projected with the current plan vs. the 35% less increase under the new plan. These type of 20 year projections are so worthless in so many ways, but the real issue again is that Medicaid is a failed plan, and the current growth of it set in motion by Obamacare is totally unsustainable. It provides "insurance" but does terribly in measures of improved health. Of course no one in the Government (neither party) is interested in improved health, they just want to spin numbers about how many are on insurance. No matter that most Obamacare plans have $6,000 deductibles that the people covered by those plans can't pay. Or that Medicaid patients in most areas cannot find a Doctors office that even accepts their plan. Ever wonder why you never hear anything about health statistics after 8 years of Obamacare?? That's because there is absolutely no change or improvement in the general health of the US population, based on accepted statistical measures. It's all a sham.
You make a strong case for single-payer, Rob.
Trump supporters must pay the price for their irresponsible decisions to impose this chaos upon us. What better way to punish them cutting medicaid. Demographics speak for themselves. White blue-collar are by far medicaid's biggest beneficiaries. Let us see - will they do it again in 2020? Probably.
4
Would love to know: Do any of the Republicans supporting the bill have parents or grandparents on Medicaid in a nursing home? Any of Trump's cabinet? The rich have many legal ways to hide their assets to qualify.. Hope a Times Intern is given this interesting question to explore....
8
There are very few poor to middle class people in Congress.
1
I like it !
The rich folks lawyers are even more likely to know how to hide assets for Medicaid than those with lesser means. There are specialized trusts. Would love to see as many Trump wealthy supporters "outed" as possible!! Go for it NYTimes..
What do you expect of our elected elite leadership class? They live their lives ensconced in a bubble of privilege. They don't, or rather the majority of them don't, have a clue to the lives of average everyday American's. Yet they're the ones we vote into the job of insuring the common good for all. Not the few. For ALL!
It should be a LAW that anyone elected to office live as one of their poorest constituents do for a month before taking the position of Senator, Congressman/woman, or POTUS. Because right now these folks, the one's making the decisions for all of us, they don't have a clue.
John~
American Net'Zen
It should be a LAW that anyone elected to office live as one of their poorest constituents do for a month before taking the position of Senator, Congressman/woman, or POTUS. Because right now these folks, the one's making the decisions for all of us, they don't have a clue.
John~
American Net'Zen
3
Has anyone else noticed how there is never any mention of regulating prices of healthcare. In all other industrialised countries, governments don't allow companies to charge whatever they like, they help to control costs. Not so here. That seems to me to be a major factor in this debate.
6
How many ways are there to spell "wrong"? These people are like three year olds thinking that if they close there eyes for 5 seconds that the numbers will change. Attack of the brain dead senators.
1
Wonder why it is red states that have an opioid epidemic? Wonder why Beauregard isn't calling for the red state drug addicts to be locked up? Oh, that's right, they are white.
1
Only way to minimize the risk for insurers is to speed up the death rate of sick people ! This is what the lobbyist and tax cut PACs are advising the republican senators !
McConnell should consider giving a death benefit to the dependent poor ?
McConnell should consider giving a death benefit to the dependent poor ?
I have little respect for the GOP, and there are many reasons for this, but toward the top of the list has to be their blatant dishonesty. Just be honest about your ideology: If you're poor and sick and can't afford health care, tough. And if you're in your 50's, have worked your whole life and can't afford health care, tough. It's not the role of government to worry about these matters. And if you are wealthy, send us a donation and we'll make sure you can hold onto as much of your money as possible. Pretending to "reform" health insurance at the exclusion of millions of people and not naming your disregard for their situation is a simply dishonest.
2
This story, like all the healthcare stories, should be the top off left lead. Instead it is stuffed further down below the fold. It is the same positioning that has been going on for well over a year. Trump antics run top left. Serious news below.
And now there is no public editor, albeit an anemic one, to channel thoughts to.
And now there is no public editor, albeit an anemic one, to channel thoughts to.
1
I sympathize with people who have an opioid addiction, and would want them in treatment, but the idea that the government would fund treatment for these addicts, but cut insurance for the working and non-working poor who have any other major illness or accident is ridiculous.
And curiously, it doesn't sound very Republican--that is, helping those who got addicted to a drug, but not those who are working and pulling themselves up by their bootstraps.
And curiously, it doesn't sound very Republican--that is, helping those who got addicted to a drug, but not those who are working and pulling themselves up by their bootstraps.
2
"Job-killing tax increases"? Jobs will be killed when hospitals, clinics, and nursing homes scale back and close. Jobs will be killed when working Americans quit their jobs to take care of disabled children and elderly parents who are no longer accepted into nursing homes. You, Senator Toomey, are a job killer.
2
Why to we keep calling this a $770 billion cut from projected Medicaid spending as though that implies potential tax savings? It's not a savings. It's a cost shift to the States where those savings will have to be made up with state taxes absent slashing who or what is covered under medicaid.
123
Charlie, it's even worse than you suggest.
A "cost shift" to a state like Texas, for example, does not mean that the state will make up the inevitable increasing difference between funding and need. What will happen in most every state in which raising taxes is a four-letter word is that over time Medicaid eligibility will be increased, benefits will be cut, or both.
What is least likely to happen is that taxes (funding) will be increased to meet those inevitable shortfalls and the attendant needs of Medicaid recipients.
A "cost shift" to a state like Texas, for example, does not mean that the state will make up the inevitable increasing difference between funding and need. What will happen in most every state in which raising taxes is a four-letter word is that over time Medicaid eligibility will be increased, benefits will be cut, or both.
What is least likely to happen is that taxes (funding) will be increased to meet those inevitable shortfalls and the attendant needs of Medicaid recipients.
And those savings will be at the expense of Americans who live in states that are stingy with Medicaid. But that expense should also resolve within a decade or so, as very young, very old, very sick, and very poor citizens conveniently die off. Voila! Republican goals achieved. The AHCA fulfills its destiny as the American Herd Culling Act (h/t to a friend for that gem).
We need to think through all the possibilities. Some states will not let their citizens live sicker and die sooner, and will raise taxes on regressive bases, further reducing the standard of living of those with lower incomes. Other states will allow their citizens to life sicker and die sooner. Some of that will be reflected in productivity and the balance in its immorality. It appears to me that the costs, however measured, will be borne disproportionately by those with lower incomes.
The model for a solution is out there and working everyday. Taking on new members, scaling up operations. Without much complaint. And very low overhead. No dividends to stockholders. No over-paid executives. Medicare works.
13
I think you are totally right. But Trump will get another 4 years and take credit for it if that sort of sensible solution is implemented.
I worry a bit at what Medicaid is doing to the country.
It was started as a program for the poor with maybe 5% using it. Expansions under several administration saw it grew to 25% of all births in the late 90's. This is a lot, but not like the expansion to 50% of all births we're seeing today.
Growth to cover the disabled, the definition of which can be argued and should, is reasonable and coverage of indigent nursing home patients feels like a necessity.
It's the births that bother me. I have tried to find an age profile of when Medicaid is first started, and failed so far, but it's likely we're seeing large numbers of young females getting into the system. This is bad considering the unwed teen issues still haunting our country.
All the talk lately is about the costs and the specious argument of tax cuts for the wealthy, but the issue that screams out at me is how can 1 in 2 births be on Medicaid. This seems almost like people using / abusing the system to receive public largess - that is not what this program should be for.
The Federal government has not been able to "shape funding" to achieve reasonable societal goals - States under pressure with limited resources could (and do now to some degree as not all states participate in expanded Medicaid).
It was started as a program for the poor with maybe 5% using it. Expansions under several administration saw it grew to 25% of all births in the late 90's. This is a lot, but not like the expansion to 50% of all births we're seeing today.
Growth to cover the disabled, the definition of which can be argued and should, is reasonable and coverage of indigent nursing home patients feels like a necessity.
It's the births that bother me. I have tried to find an age profile of when Medicaid is first started, and failed so far, but it's likely we're seeing large numbers of young females getting into the system. This is bad considering the unwed teen issues still haunting our country.
All the talk lately is about the costs and the specious argument of tax cuts for the wealthy, but the issue that screams out at me is how can 1 in 2 births be on Medicaid. This seems almost like people using / abusing the system to receive public largess - that is not what this program should be for.
The Federal government has not been able to "shape funding" to achieve reasonable societal goals - States under pressure with limited resources could (and do now to some degree as not all states participate in expanded Medicaid).
2
We are constantly told that we "can't afford" Medicaid, Medicare or even the ACA. But we are never told why?
Every household budget involves choices and the same is true of the federal budget. But our so called 'representatives' don't want us involved in those choices. If we were, we we ask why we are spending and additional 54 billion on the military?
We would ask why we cut federal revenue by lowering taxes on some of the biggest and most profitable corporations? We can afford a decent health care system to ease the suffering of the many, but in Washington the priority is the military, not the average citizen.
Every household budget involves choices and the same is true of the federal budget. But our so called 'representatives' don't want us involved in those choices. If we were, we we ask why we are spending and additional 54 billion on the military?
We would ask why we cut federal revenue by lowering taxes on some of the biggest and most profitable corporations? We can afford a decent health care system to ease the suffering of the many, but in Washington the priority is the military, not the average citizen.
10
We must be grateful for the insurance we do have, if we have it, and be willing to pay the premiums even if we must make some cuts in our lifestyle. If we look around, with eyes that see the otherwise invisible people, we will be granted insights into the lives of those who have no insurance. Independence. We are still fighting for it. For ourselves and others. We cannot fail other Americans.
1
Medicaid spending should drop. It is a failed plan that was meant originally to be a temporary safety net for those who have no means. Instead as with most entitlements it has grown massively, and now with the ACA has grown to cover millions that should not be on it. Medicaid varies from state to state so in many states like NY and NJ reimbursements to Physicians are so low (sometimes $10 for an office visit) that few to no offices take it. Thus patients have no choice except to go to the ER for headaches, colds etc., and they have no continuity of care for serious chronic illnesses like diabetes and heart failure. Medicaid also underpays hospitals by as much as 40% so if more people are on it, hospitals must make up for that by getting higher rates from other insurers, thus raising the cost of health care for everyone else. We do need a safety net for those out of the work force and unable to pay for insurance but the goal should be to shrink that pool by getting them back to work and covered under an employer plan, not to expand Medicaid as per Obamacare. A much better safety net would be a limited National Health Service that covers the poor, provides clinic and hospital care, staffed by Doctors who have received assistance for their tuition in exchange for service, like the old Public Health Service. This was actually a much better model to provide health care for the underserved.
Drop in Medicaid spending, lol. That's a good one. There is no limit to what Democrats can spend on welfare programs.
1
Proponents of the G.O.P. healthcare bill will justifiably point out that their bill does increase Medicaid spending over the next few decades. It's right there on paper, clear as a bell. Spending increases. What's the problem?
The problem is simple. If their increases don't keep up with projected inflation, and population growth over that same time period (and it doesn't), then there is less money to go around. If there is less money, either fewer services can be offered, or fewer people will be served. Their spending levels are designed to reduce Federal Medicaid support. Simple.
For very rich American there is still no problem, because very rich people don't rely on Medicaid to bring them elder care (nursing home or in home care), or child care or chronic condition medical care. They are rich and can afford to pay the toll. Middle class and poor people cannot. They run out of money and assets, and are either driven deeply into debt, or are denied care. They suffer, and they die.
If that future is the future of healthcare you want for your self, your children, or your grandchildren, then you should support the G.O.P. healthcare proposal. It will save rich people 800 billion in tax dollars making them very happy, and it will cut a government program. If you'd rather see a brighter healthcare future for most of us, then you should get involved and fight like heck. The G.O.P. is serious about this, and your life is on the line.
The problem is simple. If their increases don't keep up with projected inflation, and population growth over that same time period (and it doesn't), then there is less money to go around. If there is less money, either fewer services can be offered, or fewer people will be served. Their spending levels are designed to reduce Federal Medicaid support. Simple.
For very rich American there is still no problem, because very rich people don't rely on Medicaid to bring them elder care (nursing home or in home care), or child care or chronic condition medical care. They are rich and can afford to pay the toll. Middle class and poor people cannot. They run out of money and assets, and are either driven deeply into debt, or are denied care. They suffer, and they die.
If that future is the future of healthcare you want for your self, your children, or your grandchildren, then you should support the G.O.P. healthcare proposal. It will save rich people 800 billion in tax dollars making them very happy, and it will cut a government program. If you'd rather see a brighter healthcare future for most of us, then you should get involved and fight like heck. The G.O.P. is serious about this, and your life is on the line.
4
The question is, what is the reason for the drop? Could the population be smaller over time as baby boomers age out? Could it be that fewer citizens are in poverty and thus not need Medicaid services? Or will people be healthier and not require increased or the same spending? Inflammatory headlines require an anti inflammatory cure, facts. So, take two facts and call me in the morning.
1
Please explain to me how the Republicans can ignore the reality of population growth of Americans that dutifully paid their taxes for decades only to be cut off from the fruits of their labors? Why do they insist on making sinister the idea of caring for the disadvantaged in our nation?
Tax credits for low income citizens is like a frozen turkey for someone without a stove or refrigerator. I have an income that made me eligible for a subsidy when obtaining insurance through the ACA. I am now on Medicare and I think the whole country should be. When I take my donations to charities, I decline a receipt because I don't have enough income to itemize my deductions. The subsidy I received made my insurance affordable. A tax credit would be like spit in the wind.
4
Dear GOP Congress: Please just give us the healthcare that you enjoy, that we pay for.
6
What should we learn from the fact that the GOP is destroying health care and any social program it can but resisting budget reductions aimed at addicts? Seems rather out of character for the party of independent self reliance to want to protect junkies and save people from overdosing. Then again, perhaps that really is Trump's base.
not sure why this is called a health care bill. Its sole purpose is to stop medicaid.
Or we could just cut defense spending in half.
We could afford everything then, for everybody everywhere and build a bullet train to Florida to go party on the beach.
We could afford everything then, for everybody everywhere and build a bullet train to Florida to go party on the beach.
2
The last paragraph which refers to an alternative plan proposed by Ted Cruz reminded me of a previous comment. She said that the standard on the quality of health care would be lifted—so you could be a 'clunker' of a plan? Would Mr. Cruz do that to his family?
Why is it so hard for these Hill folks to put themselves in their constituents' shoes?
Why is it so hard for these Hill folks to put themselves in their constituents' shoes?
1
Senator Cruz's spouse is an investment banker at Goldman-Sachs. So he has zero worries about his or his family's healthcare.
Simply repeal the ACA. Easy. Get government out of the way between patients, doctors, and insurance companies.
So, 35% cuts to Medicaid in the face of rising medical costs and the retirement of baby boomers most of whom will burn through their savings and need nursing home care, which Medicaid pays for.
Great idea.
Great idea.
1
There's an email that has gone around the net for years. It proposes a law that Senators, Congresspersons, and the President be subject to the same laws that are passed that affect ordinary citizens. That might help our legislators figure out what's best for USA citizens in the current health care debates!
3
This bill is not going to work. It really is about reducing funding for Medicaid. The GOP does not care about resolving health care. They are all about keeping taxes low for the better off. That's the battle.
3
"new incentive for people to establish tax-free savings accounts for medical expenses. " Ideas like this validate public perception that some senators, like McConnell would think providing savings accounts to people who live pay check to pay check would have a positive impact on their lives. Or, maybe he does know and just wants to spin to make himself and his counterparts feel better about taking healthcare away from people who weren't quite as lucky as he. We should all remember timing and luck are a large part of anyone's financial advancement.
1
And still no one asks, "Why does it cost 100 dollars for an aspirin in the hospital?"
The reasoning that Congress is so against single-payer government backed insurance, is one, the perpetuation of the medical insurance industry, and two, government insurers would have much more power to dictate terms to the medical providers and big pharma. These three lobbies give incredible amounts of campaign money to BOTH sides of the aisle. Nobody seems to want to really change anything. Nuff said.
The reasoning that Congress is so against single-payer government backed insurance, is one, the perpetuation of the medical insurance industry, and two, government insurers would have much more power to dictate terms to the medical providers and big pharma. These three lobbies give incredible amounts of campaign money to BOTH sides of the aisle. Nobody seems to want to really change anything. Nuff said.
3
Medicare is essentially universal healthcare for senior citizens and is administratively more efficient than any private insurer and negotiates substantially lower rates. The US needs Medicare for all!
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3633404/
"By 1971 Canada had a national health insurance plan, providing coverage for both hospitalization and physician’ services. As recently as 1971, both the United States and Canada spent approximately 7.5 % of their GDP’s on health care. Since 1971 the health care system has moved in different directions. During this period, spending in the United States has grown much more rapidly despite large groups that either uninsured or minimally insured."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_the_healthcare_systems_in_Ca...
on a per-capita basis in 2006 spending for health care in Canada was US$3,678; in the U.S., US$6,714. The U.S. spent 15.3% of GDP on healthcare in that year; Canada spent 10.0%
The spending gap has only widened and It's worse in 2017.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3633404/
"By 1971 Canada had a national health insurance plan, providing coverage for both hospitalization and physician’ services. As recently as 1971, both the United States and Canada spent approximately 7.5 % of their GDP’s on health care. Since 1971 the health care system has moved in different directions. During this period, spending in the United States has grown much more rapidly despite large groups that either uninsured or minimally insured."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_the_healthcare_systems_in_Ca...
on a per-capita basis in 2006 spending for health care in Canada was US$3,678; in the U.S., US$6,714. The U.S. spent 15.3% of GDP on healthcare in that year; Canada spent 10.0%
The spending gap has only widened and It's worse in 2017.
5
I'm sorry to say that most, but not all, Republicans are hoist on their own petard. They are infected by Ayn Randism. I safely predict that unless Trump starts keeping his promises, the slaughter in 2018 of Republican folks running for the Senate and House will be historic. And we'll get Elizabeth Warren for President in 2020.
This is not a Healthcare bill, it is a Wealthcare bill designed to transfer money to the wealthy away from the middle class and poor. If that doesn't change significantly and move towards single payer (well designed, like Japan's, not Canada's) the Republican show is over.
And focusing on infrastructure and REAL tax reform is the way to go.
First, remove the cap on earnings that Medicare and Social Security are subject to. This will carry us into 2100. Also, revamp the COLA so it reflects the real costs for Seniors, not young healthy people.
Second, Everyone should pay something, even if it is only $1. And the upper 20% and upper 5% should pay way more than they now do. See Piketty.
Third, we should create a wealth sharing system so children of poor people have a much better chance of leading successful lives because their parent/parents are counseled how to do it and have the time to help them.
Fourth, we need Medicare for all with a government insurance plan and get the insurance companies out of that business.
No more bamboozling, Mr. President. Wake up, straighten up and fly right.
This is not a Healthcare bill, it is a Wealthcare bill designed to transfer money to the wealthy away from the middle class and poor. If that doesn't change significantly and move towards single payer (well designed, like Japan's, not Canada's) the Republican show is over.
And focusing on infrastructure and REAL tax reform is the way to go.
First, remove the cap on earnings that Medicare and Social Security are subject to. This will carry us into 2100. Also, revamp the COLA so it reflects the real costs for Seniors, not young healthy people.
Second, Everyone should pay something, even if it is only $1. And the upper 20% and upper 5% should pay way more than they now do. See Piketty.
Third, we should create a wealth sharing system so children of poor people have a much better chance of leading successful lives because their parent/parents are counseled how to do it and have the time to help them.
Fourth, we need Medicare for all with a government insurance plan and get the insurance companies out of that business.
No more bamboozling, Mr. President. Wake up, straighten up and fly right.
Switzerland, where I work now, probably has the best "market-based" system that could appeal to both Republicans and Democrats in the long run.
- Single payer, managed through NON-PROFIT insurance companies.
- Everyone MUST buy insurance. If you don't, your regional government will forcibly sign you up for a basic plan, and take your money through direct garnishments.
- Private insurances really manage health care, negotiating costs with doctors, hospitals, and so on. Their purpose is not "to deny care" as is too often the case in the USA.
- Pre-existing conditions are not an issue. If you come to Switzerland for the first time with a pre-existing condition, the federal government will reimburse the insurance of any costs caused by your condition.
- Everyone can choose from a wide range of options from the basic (mandatory) to "gold plated" plans that cover absolutely everything, and give you access to top clinics around the world.
- While the basic insurance can be around $200 per month for an adult, you'd be surprised that even the gold-plated plans don't cost a fortune. For around $600 per month you'd have the same access to world class health care as a hedge fund billionaire.
- Deductibles are capped at $2500 per year, per person.
- All medical costs including insurance fees are income tax-deductible.
This is real market-based CHOICE, not the obscene "pay or die" system that Republicans are offering.
- Single payer, managed through NON-PROFIT insurance companies.
- Everyone MUST buy insurance. If you don't, your regional government will forcibly sign you up for a basic plan, and take your money through direct garnishments.
- Private insurances really manage health care, negotiating costs with doctors, hospitals, and so on. Their purpose is not "to deny care" as is too often the case in the USA.
- Pre-existing conditions are not an issue. If you come to Switzerland for the first time with a pre-existing condition, the federal government will reimburse the insurance of any costs caused by your condition.
- Everyone can choose from a wide range of options from the basic (mandatory) to "gold plated" plans that cover absolutely everything, and give you access to top clinics around the world.
- While the basic insurance can be around $200 per month for an adult, you'd be surprised that even the gold-plated plans don't cost a fortune. For around $600 per month you'd have the same access to world class health care as a hedge fund billionaire.
- Deductibles are capped at $2500 per year, per person.
- All medical costs including insurance fees are income tax-deductible.
This is real market-based CHOICE, not the obscene "pay or die" system that Republicans are offering.
5
Based on your comment, I suspect many many people will now consider Switzerland as their retirment residence.
"for Republican senators from some of those states, including Nevada, Ohio and West Virginia, the pain of those cuts may prove politically untenable."
"Politically untenable"! Politically! "May prove". "May"!
Surely not!
"Politically untenable"! Politically! "May prove". "May"!
Surely not!
1
Why are no Republicans calling for the repeal of the 1986 Emergency Treatment and Labor Act that prohibits hospitals from turning away sick and dying patients who cannot afford the care? That will solve your budgetary problems and allow your rich to receive tax breaks.
1
Take care of all of the American people not just the rich or you all will be considered failures. Most money spent on health care is spent paying salaries of the working class people most also pay taxes that pay your salaries. The only concern should be cutting exorbitant profit making of all of the companies in the health care industry.
One major unmentioned problem with this skeleton of a health care bill is that ultimately we are all going to pay for the uninsured. Without the ACA we will just pay in a disproportionate number of hidden hospital fees. At least until we have a third world country where it will be fine for people to die in the street, barred from emergency rooms if uninsured. Hospitals must hike fees for the paying customers in order to keep their doors open and treat the uninsured. Trump's health care bill is a thinly veiled tax credit for the wealthy and will cost the middle class more in a multitude of ways. Furthermore, this notion that the one of the wealthiest country's in the world "cannot afford" Medicare for all with premiums according to income is preposterous. Just stop spending billions on our pointless wars and countless unused weapons. It is a matter of priorities. The bare bones, un regulated insurance plans that middle class people will be able to "afford" will cover little if anything of real needs. The "affordable" plans without lifetime limits are "Hollywood sets" of the insurance industry. That is why President Obama had minimum standards for what policies must cover.
1
The most reliable numbers on the cost and results of medical care are on the OECD website. Download "frequently requested data".
You will see that countries comparable to America spend less than we do, around 11% of their GDP instead of our 17%. They all have government run medical care covering everybody. Their citizens live longer. They all prefer their system to ours, whether run by liberals or conservatives.
Government run medical care works better because the government works for us.
The companies we have running our system work for profit.
As patients we depend on our care providers. We have to. I can't evaluate alternative various treatments and get competing bids as I'm rushed to the hospital with a heart attack. We absolutely have to depend on those providing out care. I want people I depend on to be working for me, not for profit.
The claim is that government care would cost more. This is not true.
Total costs would decrease from the current 17% of the GDP to 11%.
Government taxes already pay half, or 8 1/2% of the GDP, leaving us, patients, with insurance and other payments that would decrease from 8 1/2% to 2 1/2% of the GDP.
There would be no tax increase. Our costs would be reduced to less than a third of their current level. And we would get better care that would help us live healthier and years longer!
The only reason not to switch to government run healthcare is that corrupt interests would lose their cut. For the rest of us, there would be big savings.
You will see that countries comparable to America spend less than we do, around 11% of their GDP instead of our 17%. They all have government run medical care covering everybody. Their citizens live longer. They all prefer their system to ours, whether run by liberals or conservatives.
Government run medical care works better because the government works for us.
The companies we have running our system work for profit.
As patients we depend on our care providers. We have to. I can't evaluate alternative various treatments and get competing bids as I'm rushed to the hospital with a heart attack. We absolutely have to depend on those providing out care. I want people I depend on to be working for me, not for profit.
The claim is that government care would cost more. This is not true.
Total costs would decrease from the current 17% of the GDP to 11%.
Government taxes already pay half, or 8 1/2% of the GDP, leaving us, patients, with insurance and other payments that would decrease from 8 1/2% to 2 1/2% of the GDP.
There would be no tax increase. Our costs would be reduced to less than a third of their current level. And we would get better care that would help us live healthier and years longer!
The only reason not to switch to government run healthcare is that corrupt interests would lose their cut. For the rest of us, there would be big savings.
2
Missing from this article is the impact medicaid cuts will be on our disabled. It has the potential to be devastating. It is not just a number, but it is about the dignity and quality of life of many people who can not speak up for themselves. That includes my own brother who is developmentally disabled. He lives in a group home where his basic needs - from food preparation, assistance in eating, assistance in walking, providing him the basic human hygeine needs we take for granted (toilet cleaning, showers, teeth brushing, getting dressed, etc) are provided by very caring staff. He is unable to communicate and cannot read or write. He cannot work. He cannot drive. But in his world, he is happy, he is fulfilled, he is loved. Ahd I can rest easy knowing he is well taken care of. Cuts to medicaid could impact him and others that are disabled, not just healthcare expansion. Is his life less worthy than Mitch McConnell's? I would argue absolutely not. We need to look beyond the numbers, but at the people this can impact. My brother's future human rights are at risk, and I cannot sit idly by and let it happen. No one should. We all need to speak up for those who cannot for themselves.
5
Republicans should just leave the Affordable Care Act alone. They are there to do malice, and cannot be trusted no matter what they say. Leave it for a different Congress.
Conservative Republicans do not believe that Americans have a right to affordable healthcare. This makes us an outlier among developed nations. Other advanced countries provide universal coverage, because it is good business, moral, ethical, provides care for their citizens, and ensures that doctors and hospitals get paid. Republicans apparently care more about their political donors than their human constituents. Sad!
Conservative Republicans do not believe that Americans have a right to affordable healthcare. This makes us an outlier among developed nations. Other advanced countries provide universal coverage, because it is good business, moral, ethical, provides care for their citizens, and ensures that doctors and hospitals get paid. Republicans apparently care more about their political donors than their human constituents. Sad!
We need to redefine the term vulnerable. Everyone talks about people on Medicaid being the most vulnerable people that need to be looked out for in this bill. I don't disagree with their need for assistance, but frankly, aren't working people earning $60-70k a year vulnerable too if one short hospital event can bankrupt them? Or if they have to go without because they don't have two grand a month for premiums.
All this talk about who will be harmed by this bill and yet no one mentions this group of people in the middle. The wealthy politicians want to pander to the rich, the democrats want more and more given to the poor, and the rest of us are hung out to dry with no support from anyone. Is it any wonder that resentment settles in?
I have a difficult time watching all this talk about how urgent it is to address the opioid epidemic, which essentially means working people who do not use drugs will pay for services for these people through taxes but cannot afford to buy a health care plan for their own family. That that situation is not viewed as urgent is what's wrong with this country. I don't deny that people on drugs need help, but all the headline blaring about how important that issue is and nary a word about the working class being priced out of protecting their families is enraging.
All this talk about who will be harmed by this bill and yet no one mentions this group of people in the middle. The wealthy politicians want to pander to the rich, the democrats want more and more given to the poor, and the rest of us are hung out to dry with no support from anyone. Is it any wonder that resentment settles in?
I have a difficult time watching all this talk about how urgent it is to address the opioid epidemic, which essentially means working people who do not use drugs will pay for services for these people through taxes but cannot afford to buy a health care plan for their own family. That that situation is not viewed as urgent is what's wrong with this country. I don't deny that people on drugs need help, but all the headline blaring about how important that issue is and nary a word about the working class being priced out of protecting their families is enraging.
2
My American Dream.
GOP & Democrat leaders today announced that the new GOP/DEM Health Bill had solved all issues making American Health Care the most expensive in the World whilst covering the least proportion of all U.S Citizens and ranking last in Patient Outcomes behind the 10 leading Countries in the OECD providing Cheap, Effective and Universal Health care coverage for all their Citizens at half the cost per person than in the U.S.
Senate and Party Leaders in a rare display of Bipartisanship not seen since the infamous Financial Annulment & Divestment Act 2018 passed by both sides and houses of Congress after it was discovered that all American Financial Institutions, Companies and Corporations had collateralized 90% of Baby Boomers Investment/Security/Retirement Assets to grow their Holdings and Assets almost exponentially and to protect them, slashed Client Returns to 1% and introduced a 50% Forfeiture Fee on any Fund/Asset/Investment withdrawal requested by Clients.
Thinking they were "Too Big to Divest" Wall Street knew they wouldn't be compelled to return people's money without crippling them and bringing chaos to the world economic order they controlled.
They were Wrong.
Today, all Financial Institutions are majority owned by 50 Million Boomers.
Today's Health Bill introduced The People's Mandate...Health Care for ALL Americans, a market of 340 Million people that called ALL the shots.
Business complied,The People's Mandate was too big for them to Fail.
GOP & Democrat leaders today announced that the new GOP/DEM Health Bill had solved all issues making American Health Care the most expensive in the World whilst covering the least proportion of all U.S Citizens and ranking last in Patient Outcomes behind the 10 leading Countries in the OECD providing Cheap, Effective and Universal Health care coverage for all their Citizens at half the cost per person than in the U.S.
Senate and Party Leaders in a rare display of Bipartisanship not seen since the infamous Financial Annulment & Divestment Act 2018 passed by both sides and houses of Congress after it was discovered that all American Financial Institutions, Companies and Corporations had collateralized 90% of Baby Boomers Investment/Security/Retirement Assets to grow their Holdings and Assets almost exponentially and to protect them, slashed Client Returns to 1% and introduced a 50% Forfeiture Fee on any Fund/Asset/Investment withdrawal requested by Clients.
Thinking they were "Too Big to Divest" Wall Street knew they wouldn't be compelled to return people's money without crippling them and bringing chaos to the world economic order they controlled.
They were Wrong.
Today, all Financial Institutions are majority owned by 50 Million Boomers.
Today's Health Bill introduced The People's Mandate...Health Care for ALL Americans, a market of 340 Million people that called ALL the shots.
Business complied,The People's Mandate was too big for them to Fail.
Especially regarding healthcare, Republicans and their $800 billion tax cut for the super rich plan remind me of the Old Testament with a cruel, vengeful God, while Democrats remind me of the New Testament with Jesus' messages of love and compassion.
I don't understand why they continue to push this bill when it is so unpopular and will become electoral misfortune. McConnell's latest gambit of "bipartisanship" is laughable, there isn't one Democrat who will even discuss this nonsense in the elevator. And I voted for Trump -- it wasn't a mistake so much as a learning experience. Now I know not to waste my time on any candidate.
It's seems none of these Republicans even understand the concept of cause and effect.
Older Americans are most likely to be harmed by the Republicans' healthcare plan. Many of them will die, years sooner than they would under the ACA.
Older Americans are also, as a group, more likely to vote Republican.
Yet, Republicans keep devising legislation that will shrink their voting base.
You would think for that reason alone, the GOP would be more generous towards them.
Nothing this current group of Republicans does, makes sense. Nothing.
Older Americans are most likely to be harmed by the Republicans' healthcare plan. Many of them will die, years sooner than they would under the ACA.
Older Americans are also, as a group, more likely to vote Republican.
Yet, Republicans keep devising legislation that will shrink their voting base.
You would think for that reason alone, the GOP would be more generous towards them.
Nothing this current group of Republicans does, makes sense. Nothing.
If "these ObamaCare taxes" are such "job killers" then why did unemployment, under Obama's watch, drop from 10 to 4.7 percent? We haven't seen sustained rates like this since 1953.
1
Our elderly will be hurt by this decision. My aunt is in her 70's and lives in a nursing home paid for by Medicare, Medicaid, and her SSI. She worked until she had a stroke and now has dementia. She has no family who's able or willing to care for her. We're not much of a country if we don't take care of the vulnerable citizens.
2
I find it fascinating that Republicans fight to protect the life of unborn children but once they're born, children and their mothers are on their own.
"Republicans also said they were considering a proposal that would allow insurers to sell cheaper, less comprehensive health plans if they also offered at least one plan that complied with consumer protection standards"
So the Republicans can claim in their ads that they lowered the cost. Of course, those plans will offer poorer coverage, something the fooled voter won't realize until they need to use the insurance. In addition, the cheap plans will tend to attract healthier people, leaving the decent plans more expensive.
So, they will be raising costs while weakening coverage with a tall tale that will work in misleading ads.
So the Republicans can claim in their ads that they lowered the cost. Of course, those plans will offer poorer coverage, something the fooled voter won't realize until they need to use the insurance. In addition, the cheap plans will tend to attract healthier people, leaving the decent plans more expensive.
So, they will be raising costs while weakening coverage with a tall tale that will work in misleading ads.
Nothing so focuses the mind as being shot at and missed.
If the Republicans are going to dodge this bullet, they best be quick --and in earnest-- about it.
MEDIC!!!
If the Republicans are going to dodge this bullet, they best be quick --and in earnest-- about it.
MEDIC!!!
2
Do you really believe them? Everything is a dog-and-pony show with them. Even if they did pass something with such a grand, magnanimous gesture as not stealing from the poor to give to the rich, do you doubt for a second that they would not reverse that within a year or two. All they want now is to say they did something. It doesn't matter what. Their hatred of Obama is pathological.
8
Free tax saving accounts! My how generous those fully insured Republican politicians are. It's not Nancy. It's Mitch's dementia and his failure to take ownership of his parties misguided medical corporate love affair. Trumpcare is clear Republican failure.
5
Regardless of one's religion, it is said that one has to live through one's lifetime of deeds and consequences at the time of death. Do these people in Congress seriously think they could dodge the judgment day after causing so much miseries?
10
"Mr. Cruz says the proposal would allow consumers to buy policies they desire and can afford."
This piece along with the push to make health care savings account more important show that the Senators think like a bunch of rich guys. For many lower income folks, as well as for not a few middle income, the plan "they desire" is not attainable and nowhere near the plan they "can afford." Many would nave no money whatsoever to put into a healthcare savings account, so changing those rules or upping the amounts one can put in would be meaningless.
This piece along with the push to make health care savings account more important show that the Senators think like a bunch of rich guys. For many lower income folks, as well as for not a few middle income, the plan "they desire" is not attainable and nowhere near the plan they "can afford." Many would nave no money whatsoever to put into a healthcare savings account, so changing those rules or upping the amounts one can put in would be meaningless.
55
The C.B.O projections on the Medicaid though shocking and enough to cause unease and pain to the compassionate hearts but not to the Republican diehards hell bent on financing tax cuts for the rich through huge cuts in the Medicaid- the only available state subsidised healthcare access for the uninsured.
13
Wikipedia says that India doesnt even offer free public education for children past age 14 and the only public health insurance is Catastrophic Health Expenditure so I find it interesting that someone whose location is India would be jumping in to comment on the American health insurance debate.
1
Ok, I guess this is like "let them eat (just a little) cake"?
19
Don't these sound like tweaks they could have done a long time ago except for the fact that it was called Obamacare instead of Trumpcare?
13
"He [McConnell] scrapped plans for a vote on the bill this week after he met broad resistance from Republican senators across the ideological spectrum."
... across the ideological spectrum -- from A to B
... across the ideological spectrum -- from A to B
19
Touché
1
These people are beyond despicable. Information pouring out about hardliners attempting to bribe moderate Republicans [sic] with pennies to fight Opioid Addiction (the new fad addiction aka Heroin). If you aren't shooting up, the other 22-30 million Americans needing healthcare are just out-of-luck. It will be quite telling to see just how many sell out with the lie of "Fixing" the bill (after 7 years of opportunity) once it becomes law
These guys are expert liars and finaglers, but this time they've painted themselves into a corner.
Prepare for small print, loopholes, escape clauses, and golden parachutes.
Prepare for small print, loopholes, escape clauses, and golden parachutes.
28
If the Democrats can't use this Republican nightmare bill to regain majorities in both houses then America needs a new opposition party.
36
It is high time for us to demand the repeal of citizen united, the electoral college and having the republicans change district with precision never seen before. Until such time these horrible GOP guys will always be in power. God Help us
Getting on toward 10:30 pm Eastern time as I write this. It will be interesting to see if the Senate convenes in 3 or 4 hours to consider and reject a few Dem. amendments and then pass the McConnell bill. They could all be on their way out of town for the 4th of July recess by 5:30 am Washington DC time tomorrow morning.
6
It all depends on what is waiting for them back home !
It seems like they might replace Obamacare with Obamacare.
24
What does it say about our focus when there are over 4,000 comments on Trump's tweets and fewer than 200 on health care?
37
To be fair we've been going over health care for the last several days and there have been thousands and thousands of comments
The trump is just excited to meet the Putin, really excited in a romantic way, long hand shakes and never ending hugs etc... etc... and then heading to Putin's luxurious room, and more !
It says most Americans do not have the intellect or attention span to discern the difference between a critical issue and a "shiny object."
There seem to be three kinds of Republicans in Congress, though many share aspects of all three:
1) The ideologues, who don't believe in life preservers when someone is drowning because it fosters dependency, mixed in with the Ayn Randians (including recent disavowers like Paul Ryan), who believe concern for others is stupid and immoral. Best examples are the ones who oppose the Republican plan because it is too generous;
3) The demagogues and haters who either truly believe in their racist, xenophobic views (e.g., Jeff Sessions) or exploit it for political gains (e.g., Trump, who really has no values or concerns other than self-aggrandizement); and
3)Those who stick their fingers in the air to see where the wind/voters blow, so that now that their constituents favor ObamaCare over the Republican NoMoreCare, they grow a "conscience ". (Democrats have their version of that too- can you say Andrew Cuomo).
But what is most scary is that about half of our fellow citizens support them.
1) The ideologues, who don't believe in life preservers when someone is drowning because it fosters dependency, mixed in with the Ayn Randians (including recent disavowers like Paul Ryan), who believe concern for others is stupid and immoral. Best examples are the ones who oppose the Republican plan because it is too generous;
3) The demagogues and haters who either truly believe in their racist, xenophobic views (e.g., Jeff Sessions) or exploit it for political gains (e.g., Trump, who really has no values or concerns other than self-aggrandizement); and
3)Those who stick their fingers in the air to see where the wind/voters blow, so that now that their constituents favor ObamaCare over the Republican NoMoreCare, they grow a "conscience ". (Democrats have their version of that too- can you say Andrew Cuomo).
But what is most scary is that about half of our fellow citizens support them.
21
While DT distracts with his filthy tweets, the GOP works in the darkness to make sure that they accomplish something. Or feel like they accomplished something. Even if it wasn't remotely what they even promised or wanted.
9
Thirty five percent fewer dollars! Just two days ago Republican senators were on TV telling Americans that the bill did not cut Medicare. Did they speak out of ignorance? Or do they have a definition of "cuts" wherein taking away one third is not a "cut"?
25
Or maybe they are like the President - incapable of actually telling us the truth.
Actually yes. Spending continues to go up, just not at such an unsustainable pace. You're right to be upset if your goal is simply to spend more money under the assumption that it equates with progress.
They do. It is "slowing the growth."
Bernie has a bill in the Senate. Use that instead.
8
A nation in debt $20 Trillion cannot afford a tax cut.
8
You can't pay your bills by cutting your income.,
In real terms , we wouldn't have any debt, if we taxed people for all that they enjoy in this heaven on earth .. land of the free and home of the brave ! Just think of those precious lives , who sacrificed for us and also for the morons called our representatives ! Except for a few, none of our representatives never sacrificed anything ...only living on tax payer largess ! We never gave, they just take , day light robbery !
Any idea WHY we're 20 trillion in debt? The middle East and the Federal Reserve Board! And the Republicans are giving tax cuts to the rich again!!!
No matter what they do now, we know what they wanted to do.
13
When will these old men retire and let the rest of us get on with progress?
12
That is for God to decide .... for now God is happy that the Satan has a lot to do, clean up when the uninsured start dying in big ... huge numbers !
Took the words right outta my mouth!
Under 500 comments about the healthcare of Americans.
Over 5,000 comments about a twitter war between two entertainers.
Now do you know why they think they can get away with it?
Over 5,000 comments about a twitter war between two entertainers.
Now do you know why they think they can get away with it?
21
I could sell you a real cheap insurance policy. The only thing it covers is my profit. And the co-pay is 100%.
3
The critical difference between GOP Senators like Collins/Portman vs. McConnell/Cruz, is that the former show signs of caring for today's infants, long after today's Senators are gone. The latter does not; they are what FAKE pro-lifers look like.
19
The latter are really criminals !
If money goes to the opioid epidemic, it really all still goes to Big Pharma and some for-profit treatment centers with high recidivism rates. Oxycontin is made by Purdue Pharma and the Sackler family. Purdue also has created a laxative to treat constipation that is caused by the oxycontin. The addiction is treated by vivitrol, suboxone, and methadone among other drugs. A profit making industry for certain.
Here is the idea - Cut costs by allowing cost negotiations with pharma companies, cut costs from pharma, and you would be able to pay for the drugs for the epidemic.
Another idea, cut out the middle man insurance companies and allow us the choice to buy into a public option like Medicare, which does not spend money on marketing, sales or promotions. Cutting profits and costs should bring the budget closer to reasonable.
Single payer/Medicare for all.
Here is the idea - Cut costs by allowing cost negotiations with pharma companies, cut costs from pharma, and you would be able to pay for the drugs for the epidemic.
Another idea, cut out the middle man insurance companies and allow us the choice to buy into a public option like Medicare, which does not spend money on marketing, sales or promotions. Cutting profits and costs should bring the budget closer to reasonable.
Single payer/Medicare for all.
6
Excellent ideas. Chance of passage in this congress less than a fraction of 1%, in my opinion
Republican war on lower middle class and poor in the open. Dole out large amount of money to various senators for their votes and keep most tax cut for the 1% in order to destroy Medicaid.
11
joint healthcare proposal: universal coverage and lower premiums by requiring everyone to choose or be assigned a policy and pay income/age adjusted premiums
8
Jim, agree 100%. This is the exact system that Switzerland uses and it works very well. The key to its success is that the individual mandate is strictly enforced. The premiums of the many pay the losses of the few. The Swiss rely more on co-pays so that citizens do not have to breach a high deductible. Tealiban and Trumpanzees howl in protest when a single payer model is discussed despite the fact that US Medicare IS a single payer system. The Swiss have proved that health care financing via private insurance can work well. However, Tealiban and Trumpanzees again howl in protest against an individual mandate on the alleged basis that it is an infringement on individual rights. There are two choices: single payer or a system of private insurance with a strong individual mandate and age/income-adjusted premiums that you mention.
Funding premiums from an HSA is a great idea. That allows individuals to get the same tax incentive as those who get health insurance from their employer.
1
And exactly how many minimum, low wage, lower middle class earners have the money to fund an HSA? Which, by the way is limited to $3,400 for an individual with a high deductible plan. That amount of savings would not even cover my deductible. And I am one of the lucky ones with a decent health care plan available through my employer.
HSA is fine as long as it is a percentage of one's income !
Not a fixed dollar ! Also the premium has to be a percentage of ones income for the same benefits that trump and McConnell enjoy ! Anything else won't pass discriminatory practice !
Not a fixed dollar ! Also the premium has to be a percentage of ones income for the same benefits that trump and McConnell enjoy ! Anything else won't pass discriminatory practice !
The Republican bill is a bad piece of legislation. It will make health care in American less available for millions of people. It shows that the GOP claims that they had a real alternative to the Affordable Care Act were not true. The only part of the bill they evidently care about is the tax cut for the very, very rich.
12
I'm in my mid-fifties and terrified that the GOP plan is to ensure that people my age do not receive medical care when we reach the inevitable point that employer coverage is not an option. Anyone who isn't worrying about this isn't paying attention.
22
I'm paying attention! I am 63 and just came down with central nervous system lymphoma. I asked the doctors to kill me, but they wouldn't and spent over $500,000.00 to save my life. I have been disabled ever since. I must go back to work disabled, but I will to keep my insurance. My job could be given to younger scholars, but I must return to avoid a $20,000.00 premium. If I don't go back to work, I will forgo insurance. Republicans: why don't you repeal the law that forces hospitals to take in dying patients who don't have insurance? That will enable you to close your budget gap, and the families of the indigent can choose which mortuary to process the dead bodies? Oh, I know, you're pro-life and can't do that. Better that the decadent poor pay for their sins with bankruptcy before they die a miserable death, unassisted by healthcare. That's how to improve Obamacare in the name of Jesus Christ.
I've been paying attention since Reagan was elected and I was in my 20s then. Now I'm 58 and I can say with absolute certainty that things have gotten much, much worse. Anyone who is not wealthy and who was born after 1955 will not have a decent retirement, access to health care, be able to look forward to a better standard of living than their parents, plan for the future.
The real question is why we keep on electing people who are so obviously against us. The GOP is not interested in 99% of us except as pockets to pick, examples to criticize, and slaves to do their bidding or die. We listen to a party that devotes itself to being anti intellectual, anti government, inhumane, unkind, and cruel and then when they do what they said they'd do we get upset. If we didn't elect them to begin with we would have problems but not these problems. I fear that we're going to see a lot more suicides by cop, homeless people, addicts, etc., because we're electing legislators whose stated purpose is not to help us but to pay very close attention to the very rich corporations and families of America.
In some ways I don't care. I'm 58. If I die it will be no loss. But if our younger people cannot get ahead they will leave the country. It's called a brain drain. That will set us back in terms of being a developed country. Then again, the GOP is still being innovative on how it plans to destroy the middle and working class.
The real question is why we keep on electing people who are so obviously against us. The GOP is not interested in 99% of us except as pockets to pick, examples to criticize, and slaves to do their bidding or die. We listen to a party that devotes itself to being anti intellectual, anti government, inhumane, unkind, and cruel and then when they do what they said they'd do we get upset. If we didn't elect them to begin with we would have problems but not these problems. I fear that we're going to see a lot more suicides by cop, homeless people, addicts, etc., because we're electing legislators whose stated purpose is not to help us but to pay very close attention to the very rich corporations and families of America.
In some ways I don't care. I'm 58. If I die it will be no loss. But if our younger people cannot get ahead they will leave the country. It's called a brain drain. That will set us back in terms of being a developed country. Then again, the GOP is still being innovative on how it plans to destroy the middle and working class.
There are basic truths about any workable government-subsidized healthcare financing plan.
The cost of providing health care to low-income people will always exceed the ability of those patients to pay. Absent a single-payer system, the poor must have insurance, and payment of the premiums must be heavily subsidized by the government.
The risk pool of all people to be covered must be broadened to include as many younger, healthier people as possible. If the young people have an income significantly above the poverty level, they must be compelled to join by penalties – the so-called individual mandate.
The insurance cannot allow insurers to escape the duty to cover people, so prior existing conditions must be covered. The insurance must be portable, so it cannot be tied to one’s employment.
There must be incentives and disincentives in the plan for the providers of health care to slow the rise of healthcare costs and, eventually, to get the annual increases in costs nearer to the general cost of living changes.
Wellness programs must be covered to make the covered people healthier – both for their own good and to make the plan successful. Affordable co-pays and deductibles must exist to discourage overuse.
The Affordable Care Act (Obamacare or ACA) made great strides to achieve these things, although the ACA needed tinkering.
The Republican plans in both the House and the Senate purposely ignore what a good healthcare financing plan requires. They are shams.
The cost of providing health care to low-income people will always exceed the ability of those patients to pay. Absent a single-payer system, the poor must have insurance, and payment of the premiums must be heavily subsidized by the government.
The risk pool of all people to be covered must be broadened to include as many younger, healthier people as possible. If the young people have an income significantly above the poverty level, they must be compelled to join by penalties – the so-called individual mandate.
The insurance cannot allow insurers to escape the duty to cover people, so prior existing conditions must be covered. The insurance must be portable, so it cannot be tied to one’s employment.
There must be incentives and disincentives in the plan for the providers of health care to slow the rise of healthcare costs and, eventually, to get the annual increases in costs nearer to the general cost of living changes.
Wellness programs must be covered to make the covered people healthier – both for their own good and to make the plan successful. Affordable co-pays and deductibles must exist to discourage overuse.
The Affordable Care Act (Obamacare or ACA) made great strides to achieve these things, although the ACA needed tinkering.
The Republican plans in both the House and the Senate purposely ignore what a good healthcare financing plan requires. They are shams.
16
No one speaks of the fact that they want to get rid of Planned Parenthood, such a vital program. But then these guys really don't care for a woman or family to have a choice how many children they can really afford. And, ones born, these Guys don't care how they will survive without good health insurance. But then they are so far removed from every day life that they have no idea how most people here are a lot worse of than their European counterparts.
At the end of the day, Republicans will be compelled to revise elements of the ACA in partnership with Democrats.
And thus, deluded by their own lie that the ACA is "imploding", they've wasted everyone's time, wasted everyone's time. That's the kind of arrogance that should (but won't) be cause to eject them from office.
And thus, deluded by their own lie that the ACA is "imploding", they've wasted everyone's time, wasted everyone's time. That's the kind of arrogance that should (but won't) be cause to eject them from office.
7
The "new" version of the bill should be improving the ACA. Period. The basics are there, now start working with the Democrats. Mr. Schumer, this is directed to you, too. The ruse and theatrics are over. Done. We are fed up. Congress is playing its game at the expense of the everyday American. The House and Senate have turned their ideas of so-called health care upside down and sideways. Yet they end up at square one...helping the wealthy and neglecting the rest of us.
Why on earth is our Republican-led Congress turning a deaf ear to the needs of their constituents? Is this group so without a moral compass that they continue to line the pockets of their wealthy cronies? Enough, please. Build on the law we already have. And if it will make your president happy put his name on it. We don't care. We are grown-ups, and all we want is affordable and inclusive health insurance.
Why on earth is our Republican-led Congress turning a deaf ear to the needs of their constituents? Is this group so without a moral compass that they continue to line the pockets of their wealthy cronies? Enough, please. Build on the law we already have. And if it will make your president happy put his name on it. We don't care. We are grown-ups, and all we want is affordable and inclusive health insurance.
12
We are fed up, this is an understatement. !
The whole world is fascinated by the US fighting about whether its citizens' health and lives are worth a fig. They don't understand: there are profits to be made.
21
One can only squeeze so much blood out of a rock.
Insurance companies to offer non-compliant and ACA compliant policies? You know the non-compliant "affordable" policy with stripped down coverage will make the ACA compliant policy beyond the reach of anyone except congressional members who get free coverage. Just a slick way to deny coverage to all via the back door. And then congress will blame the insurance companies.
1
" Another proposal, championed by some conservatives, would allow people to use money in health savings accounts to pay premiums for insurance policies, not just medical expenses."
Given the fact that over 65% of Americans do not have $500 available to meet an unexpected cost or emergency suggests that the ability of most people being able to save enough money in a "Health Savings Account" to make any difference against large Health care costs or cover premiums costs is doubtful at best!
https://www.forbes.com/sites/maggiemcgrath/2016/01/06/63-of-americans-do...
As the above survey was referring to ALL Americans, how well and how much could Republicans think poorer households and individuals would have any ability to save money for Health Insurance premiums and/or premiums?
The fact is that many people would need to save enough just to offset the $800 Billion in cuts to Medicaid just to remain in the position they are in today (if a recipient)...
It is hard to believe that any Politician would think such a suggestion would solve ANYTHING to help mitigate the costs and ability of most to keep or afford Health coverage that this Bill will endanger and take away from so many people.
Given the fact that over 65% of Americans do not have $500 available to meet an unexpected cost or emergency suggests that the ability of most people being able to save enough money in a "Health Savings Account" to make any difference against large Health care costs or cover premiums costs is doubtful at best!
https://www.forbes.com/sites/maggiemcgrath/2016/01/06/63-of-americans-do...
As the above survey was referring to ALL Americans, how well and how much could Republicans think poorer households and individuals would have any ability to save money for Health Insurance premiums and/or premiums?
The fact is that many people would need to save enough just to offset the $800 Billion in cuts to Medicaid just to remain in the position they are in today (if a recipient)...
It is hard to believe that any Politician would think such a suggestion would solve ANYTHING to help mitigate the costs and ability of most to keep or afford Health coverage that this Bill will endanger and take away from so many people.
1
Maybe we could get the Russians to give us the Social Security numbers of all the Trump voters, and restrict the Medicare cuts to apply only to them. Unless that would be unconstitutional, and we know how much that would offend the Republicans.
3
Americans have traditionally believed that because we have a free society, anyone who works hard enough will succeed, and those who don't have only themselves to blame; hence the loud and strident reactions against any legislation that would tax successful people to pay for the needs of the less fortunate.
But basically every state that has ever existed in human history has had to redistribute some wealth downwards to the poorest people to avoid extreme suffering, and in many cases, revolution. When ancient Athenians cancelled debts poor farmers owed to wealth elite landowners, it was part of new beginning which eventually culminated in radical democracy.
Americans would of course prefer to make voluntary contributions to take care of the needy, and breakthroughs in modern science have changed the standard of what we believe people require to have a decent life, leading to increased opposition to social welfare, and more and more, the argument that social welfare programs are not sustainable.
I won't pretend that I know whether the social safety nets of wealthy countries today are sustainable in the long run. But I do believe its not possible to provide health insurance for the poorest people without some redistribution of wealth--whether you believe the poor deserve it, or the richer people deserve to have to pay for it. And I believe this reality is starting to dawn on even the Republican leaders in the Senate. The question is whether the American people will accept it.
But basically every state that has ever existed in human history has had to redistribute some wealth downwards to the poorest people to avoid extreme suffering, and in many cases, revolution. When ancient Athenians cancelled debts poor farmers owed to wealth elite landowners, it was part of new beginning which eventually culminated in radical democracy.
Americans would of course prefer to make voluntary contributions to take care of the needy, and breakthroughs in modern science have changed the standard of what we believe people require to have a decent life, leading to increased opposition to social welfare, and more and more, the argument that social welfare programs are not sustainable.
I won't pretend that I know whether the social safety nets of wealthy countries today are sustainable in the long run. But I do believe its not possible to provide health insurance for the poorest people without some redistribution of wealth--whether you believe the poor deserve it, or the richer people deserve to have to pay for it. And I believe this reality is starting to dawn on even the Republican leaders in the Senate. The question is whether the American people will accept it.
3
The Senate version of Trumpcare is far worse than the 22 million who will lose coverage and the hundreds of billions in kickbacks to the donor-class. The waivers will be the undoing of everything that Obamacare carefully thought through and sought to provide - including weakened coverage of people through private employers. Just the prospect of uncapped out of pocket liability plus lifetime caps on services which can be arbitrarily denoted as non-essential are enough to prove this is an evil law based on greed. Toss in the ratchet which mandates waiver approval if it saves the federal budget money and prevents recision even after an election, proof of fraud, or non-effectiveness and you have blatant legalized corruption of our healthcare. Hold out for single payer/medicare for all.
1
In the end, it's about passing a law on ideological grounds vs passing a law that actually helps people. Republicans don't believe the two are reconcilable.
1
The way to sell single payer to Americans is not price or accessibility, but convenience. Even people with insurance face piles of paperwork for any trip to a doctor or, worse yet, the hospital. Single payer programs such as in Germany are so much less complex and burdensome, which is a godsend for busy, modern lives.
I'm a conservative outlier, because I think single payer looks increasingly attractive compared to the Byzantine Rube Goldberg systems we keep creating.
I'm a conservative outlier, because I think single payer looks increasingly attractive compared to the Byzantine Rube Goldberg systems we keep creating.
4
Health care premiums would be more affordable if medical costs were not so high. Congress could start with drug costs. It is outlandish that I can buy drugs at 15 cents on the dollar from Canada. Also, reign in liability costs. I am sure there are other examples. The big driver of the health care mess is cost. The ACA did little on this and this Congress has done nothing.
1
One thing that hasn't been discussed is that right now there is a bulge in the older population, so a 35% cut would be against a larger needy population for a few decades - so it is a harsher cut than it appears to be in light of the current, smaller elderly population. And then that population bulge will die off and pressure on Medicaid will abate.
It's great that the Republicans were throwing around health care ideas today that included keeping certain taxes on the books. Sounds like very heady times. But who is writing the new, improved version of the bill? The same 13 (old) men who want to be the last word on what health insurance women and children need? How much public discussion will there be? What will this bill's position be regarding the issue the Wall Street Journal raised today? That "able bodied" people should not be on Medicaid? (Regardless that in today's skewed wage structure, there are able bodied people who do not earn enough to pay for health insurance without help from the government?)
Two important things about this bill are that is does not just cut spending on the programs created by the Affordable Care Act, but also on Medicaid as it existed before the ACA and that it will quickly bankrupt Medicare. A simple repeal of the ACA would not reduce future deficits -- it would increase them. The savings that justify eliminating taxes that almost all are paid by the wealthy come from reducing future Federal funding of Medicaid for the elderly, the disabled, and children, as well as CHIP for children in working class families. The only thing in the ACA that increased spending on these programs were increased information about the availability of these preexisting health benefits and the shared responsibility penalties which were much harsher for low-income individuals and families than for the wealthy or even middle-income households.
No one in the media seems to be reporting that the 3.8% tax on unearned incomes goes to the Medicare Hospital Insurance Trust Fund which funds future costs of Medicare Part A, including hospital benefits provided through Medicare Advantage plans. Before the ACA, was enacted the trustees predicted the fund would be exhausted this year. After the ACA was enacted the trustees in their 2010 report pushed the exhaustion date prediction to 2028 and the 2016 trustees report also predicted 2028.
No one in the media seems to be reporting that the 3.8% tax on unearned incomes goes to the Medicare Hospital Insurance Trust Fund which funds future costs of Medicare Part A, including hospital benefits provided through Medicare Advantage plans. Before the ACA, was enacted the trustees predicted the fund would be exhausted this year. After the ACA was enacted the trustees in their 2010 report pushed the exhaustion date prediction to 2028 and the 2016 trustees report also predicted 2028.
1
Look, the reason people are so enamored of Medicaid now is that it's the only "Security" people have - that if push comes to shove they have something to fall back on. The anxiety of losing a job and getting sick at the same time is real for many if not most people.
We need universal healthcare. Full stop. No quibbling.
The time has come.
We need universal healthcare. Full stop. No quibbling.
The time has come.
8
Forgo the Tax cut (HA) from the bill only to place the cuts in a seperate Tax proposal. mcconnell / ryan sleight of hand trick along with the Medicaid cuts that will not go into effect until after the 2018 mid-term elections, so that their base does notice the loss of Medicaid coverage.
Shameful and reprehensible.
Shameful and reprehensible.
Sure table the tax break for now, throw money at opioids, then add the tax breaks to the big tax deal. Now the message will be cut medicaid from "those people", because it will make society stronger. (Being poor is mostly a moral failing.) It sells much better than the initial message and has the same end.
Medicaid costs probably ARE unsustainable, so why not focus on ways to get the costs under control, such as negotiating drug prices (didn't Trump talk about that during his campaign?), and spending more on preventative care, and home care vs. nursing home care, etc. There is a lot that could be done to reign in costs without depriving poor people health care and while still letting the well off keep more than they are morally entitled to. There are areas to compromise, but our elected reps are failing us.
1
Per today's WSJ article, what about the proposed McConnell repeal of the current 80/20 rule wherein 80 % of the premiums must be used for medical payments, and a maximum of said payments may be used for insurance company profits? There has been no public discussion about this issue.
20% is more than fair for profits. Why is McConnell now allowing the insurance companies to gouge us just as big PhRMA has been and is intentionally doing with medications?
There is enough inequality in America. big Biz and the rich are doing just fine. Why shouldn't the 99% of us be treated more equitably with this issue, too?
20% is more than fair for profits. Why is McConnell now allowing the insurance companies to gouge us just as big PhRMA has been and is intentionally doing with medications?
There is enough inequality in America. big Biz and the rich are doing just fine. Why shouldn't the 99% of us be treated more equitably with this issue, too?
17
Your answer can be found in McConnell's campaign slush fund.
3
Rest assured, if the price of passing trumpcare is sacrificing the tax cuts that were promised to the wealthy, it will be more a loan that an outright cost - the Koch Brothers will see to that. Pay me now or pay me later.
9
Smoke and mirrors, smoke and mirrors, hey "look over here"!
12
How ridiculous can these republicans be! They want to repeal the ACA, replace it with something similar but worse, and then ask Democrats to work together to fix it.
Is it just me that sees the stupidity of this republican posture?
Is it just me that sees the stupidity of this republican posture?
24
WE allready have perfect solution medicare for all ,from birth to the grave. Think of all people an corperations who paid into medicare an never saw dime in benfits because person died before ever reaching age to use it. Trillions in unclaimed benfits where all money go?
Mitch, Trump's name is guaranteed to be a curse in the future; the jury's still out on yours. We're going to single payer sooner or later, just like the rest of the industrial or civilized world. Even your most gullible seem to understanding that now. Do you want to be remembered as the statesman who made the nation robust and its citizens' health strong, or the bitter, old ideologue who couldn't bare to remember his origin as a needy, little boy with polio given helping hand by his government?
19
I think he's going to be sticking with bitter, old ideologue. But yes, it's time for universal, single payer, whatever you want to call it. There are a lot of plans that work fine in other countries, we can pick and chose from what looks best.
Single payer, or forget it.
41
Let's repeal and replace Trump and the GOP!
34
As long as the PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS baloney is still in there it's worthless. Paid your premiums? Cut your toe on the lawnmower? Sorry having a toe is a pre-existing condition. Looking at retiring abroad. Have checked out a few "International Coverage" programs from the big health insurance companies. You know what? I really don't trust the American health insurance companies to abide by the policies they sell you. See first sentence.
12
When Republicans suggest that they will forego a tax cut, they are in real trouble. Or they don't mean it. Perhaps it's a lure in the water. Don't take it!!!
13
Whoa!
Wait just a minute there, my family is counting on our $73,000 tax break this year!!
Wait just a minute there, my family is counting on our $73,000 tax break this year!!
14
"We'll forgo the tax cuts." Entering the Pantheon of Lies. along with, "Of course I love you. Just let me touch it", "In your mouth never would I dream of coming!" And, "He's your President, too,"
7
Wow, people have finally figured out that the ACA taxed really rich people to provide health care for poor people. Then, mega-rich GOP donors funded astroturf groups, motivated largely by racist disapproval with anything Obama, to oppose the law. But really, it was all about the tax, as even the comically cruel GOP bill couldn't hide.
The reality is that it's a bad idea to kill Medicaid. I say nothing of the tax cut which, we know, will be brought up in tax reform efforts by this weak GOP caucus.
7
Has any Republican itemized what exactly is wrong with Obamacare (aside from the fact that it was proposed by and named for a black man)? The GOP keeps coming up with "new versions" of their health care bill, swapping in and out various coverage options in the hopes of generating 50 votes. I would love to see someone - anyone - in Congress say, "This is specifically how I think Obamacare can be improved" and then debate and, perhaps, act on the changes. Instead the GOP is hellbent on demolishing something that is working. No, it may not be perfect. But it's working. So improve it and earn the salary I pay you.
22
Nothing makes me feel more like a fully vested and participating citizen than when my government throws me breadcrumbs like a pigeon.
10
Oh that it precious - instead of a win-win, or a win-lose, they can dis everyone with a lose- lose!
1
Oh Charlie Brown!! Says Lucy holding the football. I hope no dems fall for this trap.
Tax cuts for the rich are the essence of the republican brand. It's the only reason the party exists. It's what they go to sleep dreaming about and it's what they wake up in the morning in a delirious, hypnotic fever marching like zombies to congress to go after. Well, ok, that and limiting women's reproductive health options and taking away gay folks rights.
They might trick folks into believing they are relenting - but soon enough they will get right back at it.
Tax cuts for the rich are the essence of the republican brand. It's the only reason the party exists. It's what they go to sleep dreaming about and it's what they wake up in the morning in a delirious, hypnotic fever marching like zombies to congress to go after. Well, ok, that and limiting women's reproductive health options and taking away gay folks rights.
They might trick folks into believing they are relenting - but soon enough they will get right back at it.
13
I suggest everyone buy a copy of Elizabeth Rosenthal's book An American Sickness. A Harvard Med trained MD who now works as a healthcare reporter for the NYT the book covers the many ways the American Healthcare system has evolved as a wealth transfer mechanism from patients to Healthcare entities. From insurance companies to medical device manufacturers to hospitals to drug manufacturers, all of these organizations work in a system far removed from free enterprise. There can be no market forces when products aren't priced and the purchasers have no information with regards to how the system works.
American Healthcare has uniquely evolved to take consumer money. We pay because we have no choice.
I would also suggest watching Michael Moore's Sicko. Filmed in 2007, just before the ACA, it shows how insurance companies employ physicians solely to deny coverage and payment. Sicko also examines how Canada, Britain, France, and even Cuba manage to provide better health care than America at much lower costs. Simply put, their healthcare systems are designed to care for people, not take their money.
American Healthcare has uniquely evolved to take consumer money. We pay because we have no choice.
I would also suggest watching Michael Moore's Sicko. Filmed in 2007, just before the ACA, it shows how insurance companies employ physicians solely to deny coverage and payment. Sicko also examines how Canada, Britain, France, and even Cuba manage to provide better health care than America at much lower costs. Simply put, their healthcare systems are designed to care for people, not take their money.
31
The GOP seems to have missed the part about the 15 - 22 million people losing their insurance. THAT is what people are upset about. Especially if they are in the group of "losers".
7
Mitch doesn't know how to write legislation. He knows only how to obstruct it.
14
Opioid epidemic is evidently a mental health issue deserving of non-judgmental sympathy, counseling, treatment and vast sums of money. Inner city minority drug problems have seemingly always been viewed as criminal, evidence of intrinsic ethnic character/cultural flaws and best solved by mass incarceration and mandatory minimum sentencing. Pathetic.
23
Good point.
Yeah, they can always keep the tax cut out of the Senate bill and put it back in when reconciling with the House bill.
Nothing to see here. Move on.
Nothing to see here. Move on.
5
I think the Republican health care initiative is a perfect example of the station master calling "All Aboard" after the train has left. The GOP is now tied inextricably to its own rhetoric and campaign promise to "repeal and replace" Obamacare while the rest of the country - except for an ignorant few - have concluded it ain't so bad after all. But their still running scared from that crowd because they think they will sputter....."but, but you promised"
Enjoy trying to get out of this straight jacket boys.
Enjoy trying to get out of this straight jacket boys.
8
Tax cuts or no tax cuts - Republicans do not care about people, real live human beings. 22 million people will be uninsured, and it is proposed 43,000 will die in one year without the ACA per the New England Journal of Medicine.
Every day the Republicans look more cruel and inhumane and their gala leader isn't doing much to help, looking more childish and inappropriate by the minute.
Every day the Republicans look more cruel and inhumane and their gala leader isn't doing much to help, looking more childish and inappropriate by the minute.
13
Well, that's more than die in the So-called "opioid epidemic." Isn't crack, meth, cocaine, all kinds of "bath salts" and the old fav heroin still around? Where's the 45 billion for treatment - and don't forget the biggest killer, alcohol. And what to do about that sorta legal killer weed- are we still re-habbing marijuana "addicts." The entire (selective) "war on drugs" is a joke yet with a strong enforcement vote- DEA & private prisons- shooting civilians overseas (remember the DEA assault on some hapless Honduran fishermen last year?).
Legalize it all and help those who want treatment - most will do just fine if left alone- what a disaster.
Legalize it all and help those who want treatment - most will do just fine if left alone- what a disaster.
Does Mitch McConnell actually think that speaking to Democratic senators about the health care bill is a felony? What makes him tick? Surely at this point it can't be the Tweeter-in-Chief. Trump is stuck below 40% and he only has one way to go-down.
4
I think money should be set aside to fund dying centers so those who can't get medical care either because their degraded Medicaid doesn't cover it or because of high deductibles or coverage limitations can go die out of sight from the rest of us. The president can then tweet about his terrific plan.
9
Congressional Republicans function exclusively as shills for the 1% and the corporations they own. This trial balloon goes against their prime directive, the very essence of their existence.
3
For goodness sake, you're just inching back toward a bad version of the ACA. Just shore up the individual markets and enjoy the political win!
Unless you include lots of subsidies to assist the individual markets, there will be lots of people who can't afford decent insurance. That basic fact has not penetrated the apparently very thick skulls of the GOP. Their grand ideological vision is far more important to them that whether people live or die.
1
You should not need insurance to see a doctor for a wellness visit. Nor should the cost of it break the bank. All of this, all of this, is absurdly obtuse. You insure against illness. You insure for accidentals. If you are a high risk pool, well the discussion is how do we as a nation handle this if we are truly a collective. AND, we have to look closely as to why insurers, and big pharma, and political representatives who are writing these bills, and making good money on it, are not turning to us, who they supposedly are there for, for our input and answers. We are not commodities. And if we are going to keep health coverage as a law, well we need to abide by the people's needs. Not the people who want to drug us and bilk us.
5
If it is just money, why not buy fewer F-35 and build 1 less carrier to save the money for Medicaid. Problem gone. I guess every senator has to change their paradigm - no budget is safe and untouchable until Medicaid problem is resolved.
3
Opioid epidemic, we have and addiction epidemic in this country and addiction is a disease. To pick out one substance that an addict uses and cover that particular one just emphasizes the total ignorance of the Republicans party and how unattached they are to healthcare. The ACA covered all addiction and mental health issues regardless of the substance or the affliction.
3
I ask my Senator, Rob Portman, what good will it do to give people a program to get them off opioids, if they don't have the financial means to get any possible treatment for the health problems that caused them to be dependent in the first place?
5
Let's be honest: in its present form the Republican proposal is the "American WEALTH Care Act."
2
I think it's time to end the lie that the US has the best healthcare in the world. If you use mortality as your outcome, then no, we underperform many countries, and our care is considerable more expensive. Additionally, we have increasing income inequality. Even if we had the best healthcare in the world, it is unaffordable to many citizens. For them, outcome hardly matters. Two ways to rein in cost is to eliminate insurance companies entirely, and allow the government to negotiate all prescription drug prices. Insurance companies are the mafia of healthcare. They serve no purpose except to increase cost to the consumer. We already have an infrastructure in place to handle this change. It's called Medicare. And no, negotiating drug prices will not impact research and development. What it will impact is lobbying activities and "ask you doctor" advertisements.
6
Even as the Trump-Republicans meander around their frustration, starting with the scam that they had, and working backwards, it is still an asinine way to solve a problem. A rational person would use the Affordable Care Act, and update it as has always been suggested. Medicare had similarly been modified, once it was live and running. And likewise, the ACA is already functioning smoothly--even with Trump already doing his best to tear it down. That's why GOP Town Halls recently attracted such a large, angry crowd.
From all of Mitch McConnell's tap-dancing, it is obvious that Trump, Ryan and McConnell are just looking for an Exit at this point! President Obama has already said that, if the GOP can devise a truly better health care--which maintains the necessary level of coverage, and low premiums--that he would support it. He doesn't care if it is called TrumpCare, or whatever.
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
From all of Mitch McConnell's tap-dancing, it is obvious that Trump, Ryan and McConnell are just looking for an Exit at this point! President Obama has already said that, if the GOP can devise a truly better health care--which maintains the necessary level of coverage, and low premiums--that he would support it. He doesn't care if it is called TrumpCare, or whatever.
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
4
"Another proposal, championed by conservative Republican senators, would allow people to use money in health savings accounts to pay premiums...."
That is an oxymoronic idea - premiums are a recurring costs to the individual and would obviate any potential gains by a savings account; money would be going out to pay for the premium as fast as it is being "saved", with no chance to accrue interest or investment income. Savings accounts work great for an unplanned, non-recurring cost such as the need to meet a high deductible payment, which was their intent. These guys are grasping at straws.
That is an oxymoronic idea - premiums are a recurring costs to the individual and would obviate any potential gains by a savings account; money would be going out to pay for the premium as fast as it is being "saved", with no chance to accrue interest or investment income. Savings accounts work great for an unplanned, non-recurring cost such as the need to meet a high deductible payment, which was their intent. These guys are grasping at straws.
3
Health savings account also assume people can afford to save a lot of money each year. To offer HSAs to most working class families to help them manage the costs of quadruple bypass surgery or a child born with major birth defects is to perpetuate a fraud. It won't help them at all.
1
I'm not aware of anything in the bill that reduces the cost of providing a given level of care per capita, which is the actual problem facing health care today. In fact from what I understand it rolls back a few barriers to the cost of the same level of care rising.
So in a nutshell this is BAD public policy at any level of examination. Much like absolutely everything else I've seen from this administration.
So in a nutshell this is BAD public policy at any level of examination. Much like absolutely everything else I've seen from this administration.
3
Has any Republican ever thought about a single-payer system, ala Medicare? I understand that it provides a 20% savings over what we have now. And there would be no more insurance executives making tens of millions a year.
C'mon, USA, join the rest of the modern world!
C'mon, USA, join the rest of the modern world!
20
I doubt it. It would interfere with their campaign contributions. For example, my congressman, Chris Collins, held an event in May called the PhRMA Lunch. (PhRMA stands for Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturing of America). He met with pharmaceutical lobbyists who represent drug manufacturers at was described as a swanky Italian restaurant. The price of admission - a campaign contribution ranging from $500 - $2,500.
http://buffalonews.com/2017/05/21/amid-controversy-collins-ramps-campaig...
http://buffalonews.com/2017/05/21/amid-controversy-collins-ramps-campaig...
Trump has, numerous times.
The budgetary problem isn't what -- or where -- Republicans claim it is. It isn't demand. It's supply costs, because prices of goods and services are arbitrarily set by medical specialties acting in concert within an oligopolic system.
A column in the New York Times Opinion Section titled, "The Specialists’ Stranglehold on Medicine",
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/03/opinion/sunday/the-specialists-strang...
discussed this in detail. Summarizing some crucial points:
- The "Affordable Care Act" was misnsmed. It should have been called the "Access to Unaffordable Care Act", why repealing Obamacare and destroying Medicaid can't deal with the actual problem: inflated prices.
- Physician specialty groups determine the price of goods and service. They exist to maximize physicians' incomes by influencing pricing decisions made by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
- Those prices are used by health insurance companies to set rates.
- Each medical specialty vigorously defends its interests. Entrepreneurial doctors often treat patients as opportunities to make money.
- The result is a colossal opaque network of unaccountable profit centers.
Politicians are funded by those who benefit most from this medical oligopoly. Unsurprisingly, most oppose government interference in "the free market".
Congressional Republicans' solution -- deny decent healthcare to tens of millions of Americans -- merely defends this oligopoly, the root the problem.
A column in the New York Times Opinion Section titled, "The Specialists’ Stranglehold on Medicine",
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/03/opinion/sunday/the-specialists-strang...
discussed this in detail. Summarizing some crucial points:
- The "Affordable Care Act" was misnsmed. It should have been called the "Access to Unaffordable Care Act", why repealing Obamacare and destroying Medicaid can't deal with the actual problem: inflated prices.
- Physician specialty groups determine the price of goods and service. They exist to maximize physicians' incomes by influencing pricing decisions made by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
- Those prices are used by health insurance companies to set rates.
- Each medical specialty vigorously defends its interests. Entrepreneurial doctors often treat patients as opportunities to make money.
- The result is a colossal opaque network of unaccountable profit centers.
Politicians are funded by those who benefit most from this medical oligopoly. Unsurprisingly, most oppose government interference in "the free market".
Congressional Republicans' solution -- deny decent healthcare to tens of millions of Americans -- merely defends this oligopoly, the root the problem.
5
There is also the problem that private health insurance includes all sorts of policies and rules that the customer doesn't know about until he or she needs cancer surgery plus chemotherapy or other costly treatments. If you find out you have chosen a policy that greatly limits benefits for whatever you need, you are out of luck.
“It’s not equitable to have a situation where you’re increasing the burden on lower-income citizens and lessening the burden on wealthy citizens,” said Senator Bob Corker, Republican of Tennessee. “That’s not a proposition that is sustainable, and I think leadership knows that.”
It's not a matter of being sustainable. It's a matter of being heartless.
It's not a matter of being sustainable. It's a matter of being heartless.
22
Americans can't do without a single provision in the ACA. And if anything, we need a public option like Medicare for all. Period.
5
Senator Cruz should promote a health care system much like the one he enjoyed at birth. This plan would assure proper care for the mother and newborn infant. Pre-existing conditions would not matter and all care would be equal, regardless of income. Yes, Mr. Cruz was born in Canada.
5
Well, given these proposed changes, this bill is starting to look more and more like an improved version of the ACA. Fingers crossed...
Cuz they can still get all the tax cuts for the rich in their tax legislation. These people are contemptible. I cannot wait to leave this country and never look back.
3
The Republicans can't figure out which they want more, to enrich the already well off, or to remove as many people as possible from health insurance.
Either way, a horrible outcome for most of the country.
Either way, a horrible outcome for most of the country.
3
I think the GOP's agenda is really about gutting the government programs of FDR and Johnson: Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security. They won't stop until they remove all the "entitlements". Do they care about healthcare for the population they serve? Not a whit! This is a charade, and a cruel one at that.
15
This is simple.
It's Public Option, all the way down.
Everything else is inconsequential.
It's Public Option, all the way down.
Everything else is inconsequential.
4
Where there's smoke, there's mirrors.
Mitch is a master at the slight of hand. Thankfully, watch dog groups and the real media is keeping close tabs on him and his cronies.
The devil isn't just in the details. The devil is the Senate Majority leader. He didn't just wake up today and change his stripes. There's no doubt he has many somethings up his sleeves.
Mitch is a master at the slight of hand. Thankfully, watch dog groups and the real media is keeping close tabs on him and his cronies.
The devil isn't just in the details. The devil is the Senate Majority leader. He didn't just wake up today and change his stripes. There's no doubt he has many somethings up his sleeves.
4
Alrighty. It's a start.
Republicans just have to agree to keep every provision in the ACA, step by step, until it's exactly as it was.
Then, they need to provide more subsidies so no one is paying more than they can afford in out of pocket expenses. (And fix any other problems in the ACA.)
Or, just do what everyone else does, and implement single-later.
C'mon Repubs, you can do it! (Actually you probably can't, but we're rooting for you. )
Republicans just have to agree to keep every provision in the ACA, step by step, until it's exactly as it was.
Then, they need to provide more subsidies so no one is paying more than they can afford in out of pocket expenses. (And fix any other problems in the ACA.)
Or, just do what everyone else does, and implement single-later.
C'mon Repubs, you can do it! (Actually you probably can't, but we're rooting for you. )
Would make more sense to fix the ACA rather that crafting a poor copy. (Lower premiums = restricted health care and increased deductibles.)
Getting tired of the GOP talking about the freedom to opt out of health plans (because unaffordable.). What we want is the freedom to HAVE health plans.
--Skin in the game: this is not the US problem. Our poorer health outcomes are partly attributed to our seeking medical care at later stages of illness. Seems we already have enough skin in the game to be detrimental to our health. Another GOP misdirection.
Getting tired of the GOP talking about the freedom to opt out of health plans (because unaffordable.). What we want is the freedom to HAVE health plans.
--Skin in the game: this is not the US problem. Our poorer health outcomes are partly attributed to our seeking medical care at later stages of illness. Seems we already have enough skin in the game to be detrimental to our health. Another GOP misdirection.
1
The average annual wage in America is about 40 thousand dollars a year. Please tell me how someone of those means are going to save money in a health savings account and pay a premium at the same time. The rich Senators and Congressman just don't get it and are incapable of empathizing with the middle class and their plights, just like the cutbacks in unemployment benefits. Long ago the banks changed their business model from paying decent interest on savings accounts to suckering people into usury rate interest credit cards. People don't save much anymore. They buy on credit.
The idea of health savings accounts are just a gift to the big banks to amass more capital, just like tax breaks on investments encourages people to throw their money at Corporations that have either horded it or invested outside the country.
I just don't trust Republican ideas with the middle class population and their well being. This latest fix and proposals are just putting lipstick on a pig. That was a pork joke.
The idea of health savings accounts are just a gift to the big banks to amass more capital, just like tax breaks on investments encourages people to throw their money at Corporations that have either horded it or invested outside the country.
I just don't trust Republican ideas with the middle class population and their well being. This latest fix and proposals are just putting lipstick on a pig. That was a pork joke.
4
So that is why we saved in our IRA, so that it can be used to fund Medicaid.We should have saved in a
Roth IRA instead, but we had no such option.
Roth IRA instead, but we had no such option.
1
Something will be done about the opioid epidemic (through Medicaid) as it looks like the majority of those affected are white 'working' class people whose income has been stagnant for decades. It is not the same as the crack epidemic which mostly affected the black community and which was solved (and continues to be solved) through law enforcement and mandatory sentences presumably because their poverty was of their own making.
I don't begrudge any of this. Better at least some get the help they need.
I don't begrudge any of this. Better at least some get the help they need.
This bill is so bad i that simply taking the tax cut off the table doesn't reassure me one bit. These pols and their blatant disregard for basic human decency have not given me any reason to trust that they have the american public in their best interests.
Even if I grumbled about it, I was happy to bump along with Obama care. Every year my coverage got more expensive and a little worse, but like many people, I just got on with it. Now I'm over 50 and looking at catastrophic increases which could very will mean not having insurance at all. I'm pretty healthy, but have a family history of various cancers that are being monitored, so I wonder how that plays into the economic premium equation.
I have had many friends who have devastated financially by health care crisises (even with insurance) prior to Obamacare, so eliminating the caps on coverage was a wonderful thing.
My grandmother was in a nursing home paid for by medicaid. My family would have rather been able to care of her at home, but after my aunt (a cancer survivor) broke her back trying to lift her, it was clear that they couldn't keep her there any more.
Now I'm thinking the only reasonable course of action is universal health care.
Even if I grumbled about it, I was happy to bump along with Obama care. Every year my coverage got more expensive and a little worse, but like many people, I just got on with it. Now I'm over 50 and looking at catastrophic increases which could very will mean not having insurance at all. I'm pretty healthy, but have a family history of various cancers that are being monitored, so I wonder how that plays into the economic premium equation.
I have had many friends who have devastated financially by health care crisises (even with insurance) prior to Obamacare, so eliminating the caps on coverage was a wonderful thing.
My grandmother was in a nursing home paid for by medicaid. My family would have rather been able to care of her at home, but after my aunt (a cancer survivor) broke her back trying to lift her, it was clear that they couldn't keep her there any more.
Now I'm thinking the only reasonable course of action is universal health care.
3
Senator Corker is correct to note that "increasing the burden on lower-income citizens and lessening the burden on wealthy citizen" is not equitable. But why increase anyone's burden? The Republicans promised, boastfully, a health plan that would cover more people and cover them better. We Americans must hold them to their promise. With all three branches of government in their control, they have no excuse.
2
Cruz's suggestion seems reasonable on its face. But, it's not. "Reducing premiums" by allowing insurance cos to sell low coverage but highly profitable plans is no more than saying you're offering a good deal on a car that does not have windows, seatbelts or headlights. A fundamental element of the ACA was the requirement that insurance companies sell policies that, you know, actually provide essential coverage for families. Things like checkups, birth control, preventive care . . . .
3
This is not a health care plan for all. It is only for those who can afford it and who don't have pre-existing conditions or mental illness. Let's face it, Mitch and his "death panel" need to remember who voted them into office. They work "for the people", not for the lobbyists and donors. A tax break for the top 1% won't fly until Congress takes care of the other 99%. Put Congress - the House, the Senate, and the President on this new Health Care Bill and let's see how they like it.
4
There are no adjectives left to describe Mr. Trump. His tweet today monumentally exhibits his mental incapability. I think that even in medieval times, the words he tweeted about Minka and Joe would and should be evidence of an unstable mind and reason for removal from office. These are not the words of a sane person, let alone President of the US. Why is still allowed to tweet these horrid things?
In any case, the Senate should not pass this health care bill for many reasons....Senators have wonderful health care, and one of the main parts of being an American citizen is that we are all in this together, the Republican Senate is not. I truly would like to see the entire Congress have to live as their constituents do, rural and urban. I posit that each member of Congress must live within the median means of his or her constituency, i.e... make a Congressman's paycheck and personal health care reflect exactly how their constituents must live by. If the Congressman does well by the district, his pay goes up. If he messes up, it goes down, along with his precious health care. Maybe then they will pay attention to most Americans.
In any case, the Senate should not pass this health care bill for many reasons....Senators have wonderful health care, and one of the main parts of being an American citizen is that we are all in this together, the Republican Senate is not. I truly would like to see the entire Congress have to live as their constituents do, rural and urban. I posit that each member of Congress must live within the median means of his or her constituency, i.e... make a Congressman's paycheck and personal health care reflect exactly how their constituents must live by. If the Congressman does well by the district, his pay goes up. If he messes up, it goes down, along with his precious health care. Maybe then they will pay attention to most Americans.
Isn't it sad that deciding 'not to harm poor people' quite so much is the Republican's last resort after all else fails.
It happens so consistently. One can only imagine how competent they might appear if they tried it in the first place.
It happens so consistently. One can only imagine how competent they might appear if they tried it in the first place.
I don't understand the hold up. Trump bragged dozens of times that his administration would repeal and replace the ACA on his first day in office and replace it with a far better plan at a fraction of the cost. And everyone would be covered. And it was going to be easy.
We're all waiting. Let's see that plan.
We're all waiting. Let's see that plan.
2
It isn't amazing how little has been done since the House bill failed. The goal is still the same: tax cuts for the rich, less medical care covered by the insurance companies. Everything else reported by the news represents all the special interest groups. They can't decide how much more of the pie they want. One would think, and that is asking a lot, that all the musical chairs that have been moved around, would show why we should be talking about a single payer system, and the tons of trillions of dollars that would be saved and reintroduced back into the system to provide better medical treatment.
1
i'm sitting in Canada as I write this.
I don't believe for a picosecond that Mitch McConnell will pass any bill that doesn't include a huge tax cut for the top 0.1%. Those are the big political donors who blackmail GOP candidates.
My tech team from Vancouver reminded me, yet again, that Canada covers 100% of its citizens. Even so, they pay 40% less per capita than we do in the US. And their providers and care system help them live 3 years longer that us.
Which is worse - having Canadians laugh at us about Trump or laugh at our pathetic for-profit health insurance model?
I don't believe for a picosecond that Mitch McConnell will pass any bill that doesn't include a huge tax cut for the top 0.1%. Those are the big political donors who blackmail GOP candidates.
My tech team from Vancouver reminded me, yet again, that Canada covers 100% of its citizens. Even so, they pay 40% less per capita than we do in the US. And their providers and care system help them live 3 years longer that us.
Which is worse - having Canadians laugh at us about Trump or laugh at our pathetic for-profit health insurance model?
1
The politics of cutting Medicaid for poor and disabled and at the same time using the money saved to give a tax break on investment income to those earning over $200k per year just didn't go over well, even for these sleepwalking R's. Too bad. I'd love to see the 2018 elections with that issue out there. Another issue with this so called health care bill, especially since it's all R's doing the writing, why isn't there anything in this that is aimed at lowering the cost of medical care that everyone knows is way overpriced in this country? What's wrong with a plan to increase the SUPPLY of healthcare, as in more medical students, or maybe a pathway for nurses to become Drs or maybe a plan to get more medicines to be over the counter, or maybe a requirement that medical providers post their prices or something that a free market R should understand?
I think we have two separate issues - is healthcare, and tax fairness - and need to address both.
Healthcare: We have problems with 1) out of control costs (due to lack of transparency and convoluted/byzantine ways of paying that encourage/allow gigantic differences in costs; alignment in profit incentive between insurers and care givers; and the cost of having insurers in the mix as profit-taking intermediaries [plenty of studies show Medicare is the most efficient system...]); and 2) escalating consumption (obesity epidemic, opiod epidemic, diseases from smoking, other lifestyle-created chronic diseases, overuse of diagnostics that aren't necessary due to profit motive and/or malpractice threat, and I don't know what else).
Tax fairness: We have seen the multiplier in pay between CEOs and other workers grow and grow and grow over the last 30 years. The progressive federal income tax has been one mechanism for leveling this out. We need to have a frank conversation about the wealth distribution in America. Is it really such a hardship for someone making $5 million, $20 million, $100 million a year to pay a little more in income taxes?
What makes a civilization healthy? We are all stronger if we are healthy, educated, and productive workers. We all lose if many are unhealthy, uneducated, and unemployable. Let's figure out how to make 100% of Americans healthy, prepared, and employable.
Healthcare: We have problems with 1) out of control costs (due to lack of transparency and convoluted/byzantine ways of paying that encourage/allow gigantic differences in costs; alignment in profit incentive between insurers and care givers; and the cost of having insurers in the mix as profit-taking intermediaries [plenty of studies show Medicare is the most efficient system...]); and 2) escalating consumption (obesity epidemic, opiod epidemic, diseases from smoking, other lifestyle-created chronic diseases, overuse of diagnostics that aren't necessary due to profit motive and/or malpractice threat, and I don't know what else).
Tax fairness: We have seen the multiplier in pay between CEOs and other workers grow and grow and grow over the last 30 years. The progressive federal income tax has been one mechanism for leveling this out. We need to have a frank conversation about the wealth distribution in America. Is it really such a hardship for someone making $5 million, $20 million, $100 million a year to pay a little more in income taxes?
What makes a civilization healthy? We are all stronger if we are healthy, educated, and productive workers. We all lose if many are unhealthy, uneducated, and unemployable. Let's figure out how to make 100% of Americans healthy, prepared, and employable.
2
You hit the nail on the head by calliing attention to the disparity between wealth and fair taxation. Unfortunately, it would require an evolution in the economist's paradigm to produce mathematical theory supporting an argument on the ideas of ratio and proportionality as applies to the American capitalist society. Simply put, the costs to society and its economic and social infrastructure that assists wealth accumulation are not being calculated evenly. By failing to redistribute, by way of taxes, a fair surplus on amassed wealth, we've lost balancing equity vs unfair gain. As the wealthy accumulate more wealth they gain a greater competitive advantage vs. the rest of society and this should be considered under the theory of monopolies. Because of the lack of competition, the monopolist can charge a higher price, and as the wealthy grow more wealthy they capture the momentum, creating an ever increasing competitive advantage.
Why do we have such a huge deficient now? Because we fail to recapture and redistribute the wealth fairly. They own politicians now, and all our representatives are busy trying to balance the economy by cutting social costs to strike a balance. Obviously, this is not working and why our esteemed economists have failed to make a convincing argument along this line is gross negligence.
Why do we have such a huge deficient now? Because we fail to recapture and redistribute the wealth fairly. They own politicians now, and all our representatives are busy trying to balance the economy by cutting social costs to strike a balance. Obviously, this is not working and why our esteemed economists have failed to make a convincing argument along this line is gross negligence.
1
So what's left of the middle / upper middle class still has to pay this investment income tax like they were one percenters AND has their government-sponsored healthcare cut despite having paid the largest portion of their disposable income as taxes. Nice country we live in.
2
Single payer would be so much less costly, cover everyone and give better care and outcomes. If the wealthy want to buy extra insurance on the side, so be it. i really don't understand republicans fear of a working and effective healthcare plan for this country that actually costs less and covers more. It's like the insurers and big pharma have them by the short hairs. Do the right thing or resign. We need braver men in congress who know how to say NO to a bribe and do the right thing for the majority of this country. It's not a difference of philosophy as we have been sold, it's sheer cowardice and lack of allegiance to the people of this country. We need young brave souls to run for office pronto.
5
Mitch McConnell is just wasting his time, these ideas that they are throwing out there are useless. They just want to put this country back to pre-ACA terms with garbage "catastrophic care" policies that are not affordable, are not accepted by most doctors, do not cover prescriptions, labs, exclude certain conditions, etc. And a "savings account" plan? Reminds me of those old-fashioned Christmas club accounts that banks used to offer - so you can save your pennies for a rainy day when you slip and break your leg? And a token plan "that meets federal standards" so they can really sell the other junk plans? How much is the good plan going to cost - sounds like bait and switch to me. Then there is the employer mandate that isn't mentioned here... just how many people who have enjoyed employer coverage will be forced into buying one of these "McConnell" plans if large employers aren't required to provide insurance anymore?
I know that next week is a summer vacation for the Senate, but I have a homework assignment. When you come back to Washington, please suggest one specific improvement to the pending health insurance legislation.
Not some general policy pronouncement; but one enhancement to the bill.
And, Senators can ask anyone you like; hopefully a medical professional.
One hundred creative ideas can surely help the process.
Not some general policy pronouncement; but one enhancement to the bill.
And, Senators can ask anyone you like; hopefully a medical professional.
One hundred creative ideas can surely help the process.
It's getting harder to comprehend why there isn't an outright GOP revolt. Kudos to the republican who publicly states that this president doesn't represent the country's interests and moral fiber. As a democrat, that's a republican representative that I'd consider supporting.
I understand insurance and pooled risks. However, the mandated coverage issues should be optional and offered as some sort of cafeteria plan. You want maternity care? Add it to your policy, then pay for it. You want substance abuse coverage? Fine. Pay for it. Otherwise, the base coverage should be for catastrophic issues that may arise in the course of living your life. Anything beyond that, you pay for it.
Remarkable: health care is 17% of the economy and the GOP is legislating on the fly. Anyone would not tend to their family or work in this manner but "our" elected representatives could not be any more thoughtless with such a critical issue. The Senate may very well get it done but the GOP and Trump will pay dearly/
1
Nothing Republicans are discussing would be as good as the present system. None of their ideas would make things better for Americans without employer sponsored healthcare, and that's the only test that matters. The degree to which they would make things worse varies -- from a lot to enormously. The difference between those two extremes isn't important. This is not the right time to improve on Obamacare. Give it a rest.
2
I am perplexed by all of this. We are seemingly being thrown about from Congressional crisis to crisis. And this is based on pre-Trump theater days. Am relieved to see the headline of this article referring to this as a bill, a health bill, and not a health"care" bill, as "care" was lost from motivation of all this political grandstanding a long time ago by Republican's and their puppeteers. Well at least care for constituents of this nation. Why is it so sadly acceptable that our governmental legislators are governing for moneyed interests and their political images first, and the populace, the very large populace of this nation, lastly. We need to change the didactic quickly. These self involved non-deserved "leaders" are reducing us to moral ruin, and breaking down the very motivation of our founding fathers. Democracy, as well as the health and economic welfare of millions, is at dangerous risk.
1
Health insurance companies started the opioid epidemic in the rust belt. They perpetuate it in places like PA by putting money into elections. We need single payer and campaign finance reform.
1
If the 3.8% Medicare tax on incomes over $250K is kept in place, that would be quite attractive, and necessary. Most who get that tax-cut wouldn't mind to continue pay that, which would continue to bring tens of $billions annually in revenue.
As usual, administration stenographer Robert Pear doesn't understand the meaning of bland statements like "In addition, Republicans said, they are considering a proposal that would allow insurers to sell cheaper, less comprehensive health plans if they also offered at least one plan that complies with consumer protection standards like those in the Affordable Care Act." The concept of insurance is that people who don't need money pay into a pool to buy their future security if they develop a unpredictable need. If cheaper plans are allowed to be sold that do not actually actually provide care then the healthy and young will buy those and only shift to comprehensive plans when they need them. This is like letting people buy car insurance only after an accident has occurred. The result is what we have now - no affordable individual plans that cover people who are actually sick.
Employer plans bypass this problem by dumping young and old into their insurance packages which creates the issue that they see an incentive to layoff their older employees to make their pool younger.
Somehow, we still hear the complaint that minimum standards discriminate against the healthy and the young, as though these people are a different species because their biggest needs for medical care may be years away. There is only one way to avoid becoming old. Eventually everyone has an existing condition.
Employer plans bypass this problem by dumping young and old into their insurance packages which creates the issue that they see an incentive to layoff their older employees to make their pool younger.
Somehow, we still hear the complaint that minimum standards discriminate against the healthy and the young, as though these people are a different species because their biggest needs for medical care may be years away. There is only one way to avoid becoming old. Eventually everyone has an existing condition.
3
What a mess! Now they are all over the place with no coherent plan. The objective is no longer how to craft a fair, workable, accessible health care bill, but how to get 50 votes. This is a horrible way to govern and craft public policy. At this point, the Republicans appear to be doing what they are doing just to satisfy some campaign pledge they and President Trump made. They have completely lost sight of the needs of the people whom they are elected to represent.
1
How about a "Public Option" to preserve the exchanges, guaranteeing continued subsidies to stabilize the marketplace, Medicaid expansion to all states, increasing the penalty to incentivize everyone to buy health insurance and offer a Medicare buy-in for those aged 50-64? Or just have Single-Payer and send the funds corporations currently spend on providing health insurance to their employees to a national health insurance fund which along with increased personal income taxes, especially on the wealthy and a financial transaction tax would cover the program. Move away from fee for service, negotiate fair prescription drug prices and throw in tort reform. Pay health care professionals a good salary and limit profits hospitals can make.
1
Oh, now that's truly sad, I'm sure some poor billionaire will be out of one of their several homes. The GOP is moving backwards with regressive tax "reform". Their idea of tax reform, isn't the same as the average american would think of reform. No the GOP idea of tax reform, is more tax breaks, then telling us the Social Security is an "entitlement" (it isn't) when in fact it's a trust fund. Nevertheless, they will try again, and again, and again, until they get their paymasters their coveted trillion dollar tax break.
No, these proposals are not technically sound. If insurers sell policies that are not comprehensive then only sick people will buy comprehensive policies. They will be too expensive and, in practical terms, unavailable.
As for opioid addiction, addicts, the mentally ill and ll sick people need comprehensive health care in the same system as everyone else., not targeted programs that create underfunded clinics.
As for opioid addiction, addicts, the mentally ill and ll sick people need comprehensive health care in the same system as everyone else., not targeted programs that create underfunded clinics.
So, if I have a choice of plans and am currently healthy, I could sign up for a cheap plan. If I get sick, and there are no restrictions on changing plans or penalties imposed, I can move to the more comprehensive plan when I need it.
That should make for some real adverse selection problems. The ACA comprehensive plans will then cost a fortune and will have lots of expensive sick patients in them. Is called a death spiral.
That should make for some real adverse selection problems. The ACA comprehensive plans will then cost a fortune and will have lots of expensive sick patients in them. Is called a death spiral.
1
A big problem with the less expensive policies is that people often buy policies based on cost. Insurance policies are notoriously difficult to read. Most people purchasing these policies do not find out what is covered or not covered until they need coverage. I include myself in tbis group.
I bought an inexpensive health insurance for my daughter before the ACA and every claim we put in was denied. I learned that cheap insurance does not cover much of anything..
I bought an inexpensive health insurance for my daughter before the ACA and every claim we put in was denied. I learned that cheap insurance does not cover much of anything..
2
Congressional Republicans are like buzzards picking over the bones of the poor and the low-wage working class in order to provide dessert for their already overfed paymasters among the rich and fatuous. As a result of their "improvements'" to the bill, support for it might, however, ascend from 16% all the way to 17%. Give it up, guys!
10
The Republican "health care" plan: a pothole in the road to single payer.
26
So you are ready for a single pay system? Do you have a plan to pay for it? I presume it involves taxing everyone but yourself.
McConnell and his pal Cornyn are pushing their agenda. It is not the agenda of the American people WHO they are supposed to be working for. All these last minute "investment tax" and "healthcare savings plans" reek of money for someone/company rather than for the consumer. One serious illness and what then? Do you think these two and Cruz are working for you? NOT!
50
How are taxes on investment income related to health care?
The wealthy would probably still get a tax cut from eliminating some of the health care costs.
The horse trading has begun. Watch out people!
The wealthy would probably still get a tax cut from eliminating some of the health care costs.
The horse trading has begun. Watch out people!
Of course not. They are covered.
These guys are collaborating with treasonous TeamTrump and promoting genocide against fellow Americans on a scale to dwarf the Final Solution. Either the voters or the victim classes will put them in their place--which is where this GOP slowly wants to put them.
One can only die once. When a person receives a death sentence for no crime other than their existence, they will want to take it out on the party or parties who turned them into the walking dead.
Even after the shooting of Rep. Scalise, the GOP is pushing more and more guns to more and more people and promote silencer use with less licensing, they don't understand that their actions in the "Health Care Act" and its Senate equivalent will issue death sentences to many armed Americans. They also forget history.
In the miasma of Occupied Poland in 1943, the inmates of the Warsaw Ghetto and the Sobibor murder camp realized they were the walking dead...and decided to take their oppressors with them.
Those who don't learn their history get to repeat it.
One can only die once. When a person receives a death sentence for no crime other than their existence, they will want to take it out on the party or parties who turned them into the walking dead.
Even after the shooting of Rep. Scalise, the GOP is pushing more and more guns to more and more people and promote silencer use with less licensing, they don't understand that their actions in the "Health Care Act" and its Senate equivalent will issue death sentences to many armed Americans. They also forget history.
In the miasma of Occupied Poland in 1943, the inmates of the Warsaw Ghetto and the Sobibor murder camp realized they were the walking dead...and decided to take their oppressors with them.
Those who don't learn their history get to repeat it.
Don't believe any of their nonsense. The bill will still achieve their goal if passed. Reject any and all of this. I hate to use a cliche, but a leopard doesn't change its spots. The depth of their depravity has no bottom. Nothing has changed. It is all about money and blind power. Just say no!
90
Let them pass their bill and lose the Congress in 2018. Even those who drank the Trump flavored Kool Aid will vote against the Republicans after losing their health insurance.
The Affordable Care Act can be fixed but I would love to see them get rid of "Obamacare". Yes, I know that they are the same thing but the Obamacare moniker was created as a spite by the Republicans.
The Affordable Care Act can be fixed but I would love to see them get rid of "Obamacare". Yes, I know that they are the same thing but the Obamacare moniker was created as a spite by the Republicans.
20
I fear you may be wrong that the people that voted for Trunp would vote against Republicans in 2018 upon losing their health care. They're proving to be incredibly resistant to logic. I suspect your latter statement is probably why: "Obamacare".
Doesn't make sense but here we are.
Doesn't make sense but here we are.
You're forgetting, or have not been updated upon, the ignorance of Trump's base. . . and its unwillingness to jump into the 21st Century.
I am perplexed by the concept of an 'ideological spectrum' of Republicans.
Perhaps the reason they keep circling around and bumping into each other like so many Homer Simpson sperm is that an obvious reality is being ignored: 'Low-income' people, to put it bluntly, won't earn enough money in their working life to pay for the cost of their medical care.
The only possible solution to this problem is the same solution that every other decent country in the world has in place. Are we too far gone?
Perhaps the reason they keep circling around and bumping into each other like so many Homer Simpson sperm is that an obvious reality is being ignored: 'Low-income' people, to put it bluntly, won't earn enough money in their working life to pay for the cost of their medical care.
The only possible solution to this problem is the same solution that every other decent country in the world has in place. Are we too far gone?
120
I hope that is not the only solution. We had the best health care in the world, I don't understand why everyone wants to become like Europe. Let's have a conversation about how we pay for such a thing and what changes that will bring. For one thing, we will have no choice. Have cancer? Forget choosing to go to MD Anderson. Need a heart valve replacement? Forget choosing the Cleveland Clinic. I only hope all these recent medical school graduates are able to repay their student debt before their salary becomes too low to do so. And who will even want to go to medical school in the future? Certainly not the best and the brightest.
The ideological spectrum of today's GOP ranges all the way from every man (especially) for himself to eat the poor.
1
And who will even want to go to medical school in the future? Certainly not the best and the brightest.
Well, not the greediest anyway.
Well, not the greediest anyway.
Mitch, give it a rest. Let's wait til Nov '18 and let the people decide what kind of health bill THEY want. It's the democratic way or something like that, no?
51
What's the con?
Trusting the Republicans to care about the health of Americans is treading in dangerous territory.
Like Marco Rubio's hidden defunding of paying health care providers to stay in the health exchanges in a must-pass budget bill under Obama, don't trust and definitely verify!
Trusting the Republicans to care about the health of Americans is treading in dangerous territory.
Like Marco Rubio's hidden defunding of paying health care providers to stay in the health exchanges in a must-pass budget bill under Obama, don't trust and definitely verify!
26
A fifth of the economy played and toyed with in backrooms, without experts, throwing money and bribes. A country is always measured by the (in)decency of its politicians and their pursuit of their interest over the people's. Not only has the US fell so low that the only comparison's left are the Congress before the Civil War... but only in a few countries would legislators push a bill so noxious and disgraceful as this one... Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Haiti under Duvalier... Putin has never asked the Duma to approve a law as flawed as this.
The Republican plans for "reforming" our health care and tax policies are mis-named. They reform nothing, the "deform" both.
14
Republicans: so just leave Obamacare in place if you're not going to insist on big tax cuts. Obamacare is still a lot better than the Republican version!
18
How does that help Medicaid?
I guess the GOP is now trending to make the AHCA "better" because a bipartisan assortment of Governors want the career politicians to pull their thumbs out of their mouths, change their diapers, and get those pesky protesters out of their office hallways.
5
By the time they get done negotiating this, they will basically have Obamacare. A program that was designed after a proposal from the Heritage Foundation (a Conservative think tank). So what was the point of all this? They were against a program from an African-American.
91
They are simply greedy, vengeful men "led" by a vengeful Pres.
The two parties working together to fix the ACA would be the intelligent, democratic way to approach this. These men don't practice democracy!
The two parties working together to fix the ACA would be the intelligent, democratic way to approach this. These men don't practice democracy!
Tax free savings accounts are a joke! Very few in the middle class can save any money to put in them, tax free or not. Also more needs to be done to assure Medicaid is there for seniors in nursing homes since over 66% of seniors finally have to use Medicaid after using their savings, selling their homes and cars etc.
43
If this goes through, I guess rich Republicans will just have to settle for the second-best BMW or Mercedes model next year.
9
The photo perfectly encapsulates the REAL problem. Two very elderly MEN
" steering" healthcare for us all. Time to retire, and enjoy your money, boys. Time is getting short.
" steering" healthcare for us all. Time to retire, and enjoy your money, boys. Time is getting short.
32
Do whatever you think is better, but at least have some discussion about it, listen to MDs, hospitals, pharmacy, nurses etc and then decide.
This is not Obama care or Trump care, it's America Care.
Can't believe that something so important can be decided in just 4 weeks
This is not Obama care or Trump care, it's America Care.
Can't believe that something so important can be decided in just 4 weeks
23
The senate, house and white house should all sign up for the same health care plan they are suggesting for the general population. If its tremendous, then they can sign up themselves and their families.I know they have a different health plan but it should be set aside and they should be in the market just like many of people they represent. This is really put your own health care where your mouth is. This might give our legislators some sense of what it is to be mean.
28
Actually, members of Congress and their staffs are required to purchase from ACA exchanges. Section 1312(d)(3)(D) of the ACA requires that they purchase from an exchange, and currently both Members of Congress and staff choose from DC Health Link. The Federal Government subsidizes 72% of their premiums if they purchase a gold tier plan; i.e. they pay 28%. If the ACA is repealed, MOC and staff can return to the Federal Employees Health Benefit Plan, which is the plan from which other Federal Employees purchase their health insurance.
Let's not rejoice just yet. There was more than one type of tax cut in both the House and Senate bills.
7
Increasing the tax credits mostly benefits the well off; messing up the comprehensive insurance requirements hurts the sick and elderly by leading to higher premiums; while leaving the poor without full coverage; and reducing Medicaid federal funding hurts 70 million across all segments of our society. Work with the Democrats to fix Obamacare, don't make things even worse!
leaving the taxes on certain investment income is an insignificant concession in terms of its practical impact - what matters in our economy is not how much our government taxes, but how much it spends! this is because the difference is made up by deficit spending anyways. I personally favor a total repeal of obamacare at least for people who are not on Medicaid. If this compromise can achieve that - it would be a master stroke. we will ofcourse need tax reform afterwards
Answer me this, Republicans: How much will my insurance plan cost me when you're through and what will the deductibles and co-pays be? Oh. You don't know. I'll have to wait on the insurance companies to decide and tell me. Oh. So I guess the insurance companies really have control over "access" and "affordability." OK. So why do we need Congress and the president? You're all fired.
37
“It’s not equitable to have a situation where you’re increasing the burden on lower-income citizens and lessening the burden on wealthy citizens,” said Senator Bob Corker, Republican of Tennessee. “That’s not a proposition that is sustainable, and I think leadership knows that.”
Well, that's what they proposed, and they knew it.
Well, that's what they proposed, and they knew it.
42
You would think. The GOP plan does nothing to correct the reasons we pay twice what the rest of the world pays for poorer outcomes.
Yes, that was a curious remark from a Republican. I wonder if we'll see him crossing the aisle. But, they have a way of talking like Democrats for the public sometimes...
The silver lining is that the complete incompetence of congressional republicans and White House staffers far outweighs their malevolence. I'm comfortable with their perpetual standoff with the bumbling gunslinger in the mirror. Let Mitch be the shakiest gun in DC.
7
The tax cut and health care "reform" must both go down for the good of the country. Strike them down while we have them on the run.
9
Here's the deal:
Leave Medicaid Alone until Single Payer is implemented.
Cancel all the wars & the F-35.
Increase cap. gains tax. It used to actually cost a bit at tax-time to make scads of money on money in giant windfalls from doing nothing.
Leave Medicaid Alone until Single Payer is implemented.
Cancel all the wars & the F-35.
Increase cap. gains tax. It used to actually cost a bit at tax-time to make scads of money on money in giant windfalls from doing nothing.
42
It's a good thing that they want to increase money to combat opioid addiction, but what will Republicans be able to turn to to ease their suffering over having voted in people who care not one whit about their welfare?
This is cruel, even by Republican standards.
This is cruel, even by Republican standards.
11
At least the big oil companies cough up billions of dollars in clean-up and relief efforts whenever there's a major spill ... Why can't big pharma cover treatment costs for the millions they intentionally plied with their opiates?
7
Oh, those poor Republicans! Yes, I am experiencing that most satisfying (at least these days) of political sentiments -- Schadenfreude! Does the Republican leadership really expect that their unruly caucus will march in lockstep to this desperate effort to punish Barrack Obama for being President while Black, at the expense of requiring the super-rich to continue paying at least a token amount of taxes? Mitch McConnell will continue to find himself trying to herd cats. There is even talk that the Republican leadership is considering, as a last resort, trying to work out a compromise with the Democrats -- something the GOP rank-and-file will never accept, and I would certainly hope the Democrats would also reject it.
4
The republican devil is in the details -- how much tax cut are they willing to give up ? My bet that they will forgo a minuscule % so they can say, "hey look, we gave up our tax cuts !"
Watch them, watch them very, very closely.
Watch them, watch them very, very closely.
1
Jump for joy. No tax cuts for the wealthy just tax-free healtj savings accounts. Health care is not about tax cuts or the opiod epidemic. It's what to do about mom and dad when they can no longer care fir themselves, what to do about the two lrading causrs of desth--heart disease and cancer. How do these so-called fixes begin to deal with the expensive care required ti deal with these health issues for people currently on Medicaid who can't afford to pay for their current insurance nevermind a health savings account?
5
"Senate Republicans are also considering a plan from Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas. Under it, if an insurer offered at least one plan that met certain federal requirements, such as maternity care, mental health coverage and emergency services, it could also sell insurance policies that did not meet those standards."
So, here's my question: If someone buys a cheaper plan, one that doesn't cover emergency room, and they show up in an emergency room, do they get turned away. Not likely. The taxpayer will most likely pick up the bill. The only solution in universal healthcare, all for one and one for all.
So, here's my question: If someone buys a cheaper plan, one that doesn't cover emergency room, and they show up in an emergency room, do they get turned away. Not likely. The taxpayer will most likely pick up the bill. The only solution in universal healthcare, all for one and one for all.
19
Jimmy: They'll get ER care, then a bill. If they have money, a job or a house, they won't be able to dodge paying through the nose. Without the negotiated rates for hospitalization, you pay full freight.
Well, the taxpayer will pick up the rest of the bill, after the patient is drained of any financial resources they might have lying around...
1
So let's see... The GOP now wants to not cut taxes and will not make it so that sick people and poor people can get insurance that actually covers their needs.
They are taking a route that makes everyone mad at them instead of almost everyone?
The sticking point has been and always will be that people left outside of the huge business and huge Medicare market cannot affordably get insurance that will protect them if they get very ill or get a chronic illness. As long as the market remains a step child - neither business coverage or Medicare, then it will be unaffordable. There is no fix except subsidies.
All the plans from the GOP dance around this fact: to make the equation balance, then poor people, independently employed people, underemployed people cannot get sick. If they do, they are out of luck. One Democrat - who got excoriated for his comment- said years ago that the GOP plan is "Don't get sick, and if you do, die quickly."
So changing the optics on the taxes, or funding opioid programs are all good. But neither will keep a 33 year old, independently employed cancer patient, or a 50-something self employed diabetic out of bankruptcy. And it may not even keep them alive.
And that means that the GOP does not have a health care plan.
They are taking a route that makes everyone mad at them instead of almost everyone?
The sticking point has been and always will be that people left outside of the huge business and huge Medicare market cannot affordably get insurance that will protect them if they get very ill or get a chronic illness. As long as the market remains a step child - neither business coverage or Medicare, then it will be unaffordable. There is no fix except subsidies.
All the plans from the GOP dance around this fact: to make the equation balance, then poor people, independently employed people, underemployed people cannot get sick. If they do, they are out of luck. One Democrat - who got excoriated for his comment- said years ago that the GOP plan is "Don't get sick, and if you do, die quickly."
So changing the optics on the taxes, or funding opioid programs are all good. But neither will keep a 33 year old, independently employed cancer patient, or a 50-something self employed diabetic out of bankruptcy. And it may not even keep them alive.
And that means that the GOP does not have a health care plan.
15
WHAT? Money to help opioid addiction? How about passing laws to break down the doors of these top pharmaceutical executives, with the media present with swat teams and handcuffs, since they are drug dealers and pushers. Why should they be treated any different from the dealers on the street?
5
Huh, the Republicans have come to the conclusion that they must tax to pay for certain government benefits. Really? I'll believe it when I see it.
I don't trust McConnell. This is a man with a heart of stone. Saving billions in Medicaid cuts to benefit the Koch brothers and other wealthy donors of his campaign funds.
9
Trump’s total betrayal of the people who put him in office should be noted. As misguided as their faith in him may be, a lot of people believed him when he said he would never cut Medicaid, would make plans in the individual market better and cheaper, and would “cover everybody.” Right now those promises all look like bald-faced lies.
He has demonstrated zero interest in defending his campaign promises. He seems to blithely accept whatever deplorable policy Paul Ryan or Mitch McConnell cook up, offers no substantive input, and does little other than offer some weak cheerleading whenever it looks like a vote might be imminent. He appears to want a pass a bill so he can say he passed a bill – regardless of what’s in it.
He has demonstrated zero interest in defending his campaign promises. He seems to blithely accept whatever deplorable policy Paul Ryan or Mitch McConnell cook up, offers no substantive input, and does little other than offer some weak cheerleading whenever it looks like a vote might be imminent. He appears to want a pass a bill so he can say he passed a bill – regardless of what’s in it.
4
Still a really, really bad bill that takes coverage away from tens of millions.
I think basic health care isn't a luxury but obviously not everyone agrees with that.
I think basic health care isn't a luxury but obviously not everyone agrees with that.
7
Warren Buffet noted that almost all Senators and Representatives would gain huge benefits from the tax breaks in the House and Senate bills. I averaged Senator incomes, and using Buffet's metrics, the typical Senator gains $450K. I doesn't even take lobbyists to twist their arms - these people are dealing themselves half a million dollars annual income increase. Of course they want that in the bill, and for sure it's not going to disappear easily.
While I'm glad that I heard Buffet explain it, my question is: shouldn't the Times be providing these insights? It would be a good idea to know, for any legislation, what benefits it offers incumbents. Of course it's impossible to be precise without tax returns, so the President's take has to approximated ...
While I'm glad that I heard Buffet explain it, my question is: shouldn't the Times be providing these insights? It would be a good idea to know, for any legislation, what benefits it offers incumbents. Of course it's impossible to be precise without tax returns, so the President's take has to approximated ...
7
What are we waiting for GOP to come up with ideas? Democrats should get their act together propose serious, universal coverage as a matter of principle. Just because they lost the election doesn't mean they lost their principles--or did they?
3
The Democrats clearly have proposed this, over and over again. The Republicans, who ignore all Democratic suggestions, control whether anything gets to be voted on in Congress.
2
Have they?
Republicans didn't put the kibosh on universal healthcare. Democrats did. In 2008 neither candidate proposed it. In 2009, Democrats killed the public option. In 2014, Democrats hid from criticism of Obamacare and pretended not to have voted for it. In Kentucky they gave it a different name so people would accept its benefits without crediting the party that enacted them. In 2016, Democrats across the spectrum ridiculed Bernie Sanders's proposal for Medicare for All.
Today, HR 676 has 62 cosponsors, and that measly figure overstates their support. Many putative sponsors make no mention of the bill, or any positive healthcare proposal, on their website. Democratic leaders seem content to criticize the most unpopular portions of the Republican bill. She have you heard one frankly admit that universal healthcare will save the country money, and that the rich will pay more, and that's OK?
Socialized medicine is a pocketbook win for at least 80% of Americans. The country as a whole would be better off. Americans would face less stress and worry over current and potential expenses, including bankruptcy.
But the people who might wind up paying more are those whose coverage is good and whose lives are secure. In other words: the donor class. Of both parties.
If you wonder why we don't have universal healthcare in America, follow the money. Always a safe bet.
Republicans didn't put the kibosh on universal healthcare. Democrats did. In 2008 neither candidate proposed it. In 2009, Democrats killed the public option. In 2014, Democrats hid from criticism of Obamacare and pretended not to have voted for it. In Kentucky they gave it a different name so people would accept its benefits without crediting the party that enacted them. In 2016, Democrats across the spectrum ridiculed Bernie Sanders's proposal for Medicare for All.
Today, HR 676 has 62 cosponsors, and that measly figure overstates their support. Many putative sponsors make no mention of the bill, or any positive healthcare proposal, on their website. Democratic leaders seem content to criticize the most unpopular portions of the Republican bill. She have you heard one frankly admit that universal healthcare will save the country money, and that the rich will pay more, and that's OK?
Socialized medicine is a pocketbook win for at least 80% of Americans. The country as a whole would be better off. Americans would face less stress and worry over current and potential expenses, including bankruptcy.
But the people who might wind up paying more are those whose coverage is good and whose lives are secure. In other words: the donor class. Of both parties.
If you wonder why we don't have universal healthcare in America, follow the money. Always a safe bet.
Reply to Lowden
Democrats did not kill the Public Option. They were one vote short.
In other words, if there were only Democrats in the Congress, the Public Option would have passed overwhelmingly.
As for Bernie, for years he advocated Medicaid for all. It wasn't until the Republican governors failed to expand Medicaid that he realized the state-based approach was not good and switched to Medicare for All in the spring of 2016. (He still used the state-based approach for his free college plan)
Clinton strongly supported a Public Option and lowering the age of access to Medicare (this again had came up one vote short---because CT sent Lieberman -I-Insurance industry--rather than the Democrat Ned Lamont, to the Senate)
If Democrats are cautious, it is because of the well-demonstrated flood of money supporting toxic negative ads that comes from even minor fixes to health care. Voter reaction to the insurance industry ads sunk Clinton's first attempt to provide universal health insurance. Fooled voter reaction to the ACA threw the Democrats out of power and blocked all attempts to repair it and to add a Public Option,
Those who continue to fail to see the difference between Republicans and Democrats and so, e.g., vote for Nader and Stein, condemn us to Republican policies and to (thanks to Nader voters) Alito and Roberts on the Supreme Court (thus allowing Republicans to block Medicaid expansion) and (thanks to Stein voters) Gorsuch.
Democrats did not kill the Public Option. They were one vote short.
In other words, if there were only Democrats in the Congress, the Public Option would have passed overwhelmingly.
As for Bernie, for years he advocated Medicaid for all. It wasn't until the Republican governors failed to expand Medicaid that he realized the state-based approach was not good and switched to Medicare for All in the spring of 2016. (He still used the state-based approach for his free college plan)
Clinton strongly supported a Public Option and lowering the age of access to Medicare (this again had came up one vote short---because CT sent Lieberman -I-Insurance industry--rather than the Democrat Ned Lamont, to the Senate)
If Democrats are cautious, it is because of the well-demonstrated flood of money supporting toxic negative ads that comes from even minor fixes to health care. Voter reaction to the insurance industry ads sunk Clinton's first attempt to provide universal health insurance. Fooled voter reaction to the ACA threw the Democrats out of power and blocked all attempts to repair it and to add a Public Option,
Those who continue to fail to see the difference between Republicans and Democrats and so, e.g., vote for Nader and Stein, condemn us to Republican policies and to (thanks to Nader voters) Alito and Roberts on the Supreme Court (thus allowing Republicans to block Medicaid expansion) and (thanks to Stein voters) Gorsuch.
As a beneficiary of the ACA after 18 years of self-employment without health insurance, I can confirm that Obamacare is far from perfect. The premiums are too high. Not enough attention was paid to reining in med & pharma costs; but it would actually require bill writers to maybe study Europe closely to see how they do it. And the insurance industry itself is part of the cost problem, as others here have noted.
The Republicans' words make it clear that their primary concern is money, not access for all to affordable care. Like their corporate masters, it doesn't occur to them that investing in people is the best way to make a country strong, competent and competitive.
Get rid of the insurance parasites and give us national health insurance for all, now.
The Republicans' words make it clear that their primary concern is money, not access for all to affordable care. Like their corporate masters, it doesn't occur to them that investing in people is the best way to make a country strong, competent and competitive.
Get rid of the insurance parasites and give us national health insurance for all, now.
26
If the GOP simply doesn't believe in national; health insurance,safety nets, federal subsidies, government regulation & oversight--if the GOP just wants to starve the beast (government)- in order to reduce the debt & bolster market 'freedom' - then 90% of Americans will suffer devastating medical costs & personal consequences. Suffering & death, disability, unemployment, shattered families--and most of those Values the GOP also claims to treasure...will be undermined by the harshest destabilization of society.
The Dow may rise, but the nation will crumble.
The Dow may rise, but the nation will crumble.
8
Tax cut or not, this does nothing for the 23 million Americans who will lose their insurance and the many millions more from the loss of Medicaid benefits.
4
Freeloaders are those that want something for nothing such as those that want all America has to give without paying taxes. That makes Mitch McConnell and his ilk freeloaders.
Republicans lower taxes then point to the rising debt as a means to cut programs and health care.
We should be raising taxes in order to keep America strong, invest in people and remain solvent. A country could not make a better investment than in its own people.
Countries that do not pay taxes are not fit to live in.
Republicans lower taxes then point to the rising debt as a means to cut programs and health care.
We should be raising taxes in order to keep America strong, invest in people and remain solvent. A country could not make a better investment than in its own people.
Countries that do not pay taxes are not fit to live in.
6
Wake me up when somebody starts talking of price control and putting a stop to Drugs and Emergency Care Price Gouging. We keep on with this farce that Health Care is a Free Market while subsidizing it to the tunes of billions of tax payers money without stringent price control.
There is a middle ground between Free and Unaffordable Health Care.
There is a middle ground between Free and Unaffordable Health Care.
They are not going to forego a tax cut. They will just repeal now and cut taxes for the rich later.
3
This bill doesn't address any of the issues of cost or price transparency. You can't shop around and buying a bare bones plan is not really insurance.
Go back to the deliverable - what problem are you trying to solve because this doesn't fix anything
They just want to say they repealed it but they are not fixing it.
Go back to the deliverable - what problem are you trying to solve because this doesn't fix anything
They just want to say they repealed it but they are not fixing it.
2
The most concerning part of the Republican plan is the change of Medicare to a "block grant" to states. This will require states to ultimately pay for more and more of this program from state tax revenue. In addition the GOP plan has a provision for Federal government fine tuning of what states can pay for their Medicaid recipients, with high cost states receiving cuts in funding due to their "profligacy". Then, after putting in place forces which will increase state taxes, the Republicans plan to eliminate the deduction for state income taxes in their upcoming Federal tax reform plan. For high cost of living states like California and New York, it is a triple whammy.
What about leaving the Affordable Care Act alone, or maybe fine tuning around the edges where actual improvements in care or cost containment can be made? What about raising the income threshold for the ACA taxes so that they will spare the non-super wealthy who are trying to save for college or retirement?
Changing Medicare is a big mistake. It is the most efficient, low overhead system we have.
What about leaving the Affordable Care Act alone, or maybe fine tuning around the edges where actual improvements in care or cost containment can be made? What about raising the income threshold for the ACA taxes so that they will spare the non-super wealthy who are trying to save for college or retirement?
Changing Medicare is a big mistake. It is the most efficient, low overhead system we have.
10
Just to shed a little perspective on using a health savings account to pay insurance premiums: The cap on HSA contributions for 2017 is about $280 per month for a single person. When I was self-employed, my insurance premium on a pretty cheap plan through Blue Cross Blue Shield was $500 a month.
So it's a great idea if a) I can find a new job with company-provided health benefits quickly, and b) don't get sick and need to use the HSA funds to pay the deductible on my high-deductible plan.
As we say in the software industry, what's the user story for allowing the HSA monies to be used to pay for insurance? Is it for people who are out of work for only a few weeks or months? For people whose HSA is the size of a mature 401(k)?
If anybody has any ideas, I'd love to hear them. Maybe I'm missing something.
So it's a great idea if a) I can find a new job with company-provided health benefits quickly, and b) don't get sick and need to use the HSA funds to pay the deductible on my high-deductible plan.
As we say in the software industry, what's the user story for allowing the HSA monies to be used to pay for insurance? Is it for people who are out of work for only a few weeks or months? For people whose HSA is the size of a mature 401(k)?
If anybody has any ideas, I'd love to hear them. Maybe I'm missing something.
2
Eliminating a tax cut does nothing to decrease deductibles or increase the conditions covered by the insurance. It does nothing about leaving people with pre-existing conditions with only the most expensive policies to chose from. In fact, it does nothing to fix the problems with the AHCA at all. The Republicans are playing with taxes, while we are worried about healthcare.
3
In the Republican mindset, the public has a right to forgo health insurance and health insurance is a commodity, just as any other consumer good (TV, automobile, clothing, food) is a commodity. As a commodity, it should be subjected to the economic laws of supply and demand. Thus, it is the responsibility of the individual to be healthy and the individual mandate should be scuttled as a relic of government overreach. So what happens when the uninsured individual is involved in an accident, a victim of crime, has a heart attack, or some other life threatening event occurs and requires emergency medical care? According to our laws, that individual has a right to receive emergency care and emergency rooms cannot deny a patient in such circumstances. This, of course, leads to the hospital raising prices for everyone else who is insured. The Republican plan would make basic health insurance less affordable and emergency rooms will as a consequence, be used more and more by the uninsured. Why anyone would want to return to the "good old days" is beyond me.
2
Why don't the Republicans and Democrats come around to addressing why our health care costs so much more than that of other countries? The major problem with health care is that the costs of the services themselves or the number of services prescribed keep increasing at a good clip.
You can reduce the cost of the system by passing health care plans that decrease covered benefits and force people to pay more in premiums and deductibles, but that approach does not meet the goal of providing affordable health care for all. Having a system in place that can effectively negotiate with providers to actually lower how much services and drugs cost and that rewards outcomes rather than number of profitable services ordered is much more helpful thrifty, and outcomes don't have to suffer.
The US pays much more than other countries but achieves no better outcomes and even worse outcomes in some measures, so why are we doing that? The answer is that we are providing higher profits to certain segments of the industry. High profits should not drive a health care system designed to provided affordable care for all. Both parties know this, but we are faced with immense pressure from the special interests.
Sorry, but that is the way to go, not repeating versions of a too costly system to begin with. Single payer could probably do this, but then maybe some government-private hybrid system better than what we have now could too. I think the latter is common in other countries.
You can reduce the cost of the system by passing health care plans that decrease covered benefits and force people to pay more in premiums and deductibles, but that approach does not meet the goal of providing affordable health care for all. Having a system in place that can effectively negotiate with providers to actually lower how much services and drugs cost and that rewards outcomes rather than number of profitable services ordered is much more helpful thrifty, and outcomes don't have to suffer.
The US pays much more than other countries but achieves no better outcomes and even worse outcomes in some measures, so why are we doing that? The answer is that we are providing higher profits to certain segments of the industry. High profits should not drive a health care system designed to provided affordable care for all. Both parties know this, but we are faced with immense pressure from the special interests.
Sorry, but that is the way to go, not repeating versions of a too costly system to begin with. Single payer could probably do this, but then maybe some government-private hybrid system better than what we have now could too. I think the latter is common in other countries.
2
Physicians and others learned to game the system and went from being upper middle class to wealthy on the of the suffering of others.
1
Health savings plans? The real income of working poor and working class folks have not increased in years. Out of what non-existent excess income in their monthly household budgets are they supposed to "save" for health care? As if that would pay for much. And tax credits? Have none of these folks ever lived month-to-month? A tax credit is useless if you have to wait a year to collect it.
9
Most people don't earn enough to pay for the treatment of many life-threatening diseases such as cancer, heart attack or stroke, even if they used their entire salary. They certainly cannot save enough, even if it is tax free.
1
So, out of the 800 or so BILLION dollars being cut from Medicaid, let's set aside a bribe of a few billion for the senators who are wavering so that they can go back to their states and claim that they "got something" in exchange for voting to eliminate health care for you and your parents. The rest can go to the 1%, and the states can again offer sub-par "insurance" which covers not much of anything.
5
Yep. They figure they can always vote new tax cuts for their rich pals. But how often do you get to slash horribly at a program that does so much good for the poor? It's just a treat they can't bring themselves to pass up. Such is the malice with which they view all but their own kind. And by that, I mean wealthy and cruel.
4
Not a single thing in this amended health care proposal does anything about the 22 million who will lose coverage, not to mention the reduced coverage that millions will suffer through the "bare bones" policies that will now be marketed. Smoke and mirrors.
3
This bill is a tax cut bill. Those on easy street get more, those on Main Street less. That's the American way most years since 1981.
4
Since the health care bill is tantamount to a tax cut for the wealthiest 1%, the Republicans aren't foregoing a tax bill at all.
2
The tax cut is the entire reason for the bill. Keeping the tax in place, and why bother to change all the rest? Instead of "repealing" why not just keep the tax, fix the ACA, and move on? Gutting Medicaid to give hundreds of billions in tax cuts that almost entirely go to people earning over $250,000 a year was a terrible idea to begin with. The obviously false prattle that this was an attempt to "save health care" or "save Medicaid" were just lies being broadcast about to fool anyone gullible enough about the real intention, though the real intention is clear in the bill. McConnell probably figures that if he gives up the tax cut here, he can bring it back and more in the great Republican "tax reform" effort that comes next. Watch how much of that "tax reform" ends up going to those same over-$250,000 income earners.
3
It only now occurred to them to perhaps not try to make this into a huge giveaway for the wealthy?
1
Everyone should approve a health care plan that provides the same insurance coverage, with the same deductibles and copays, as the plan that members of Congress have. Why should voters have less coverage that their elected representatives? In fact, why not allow all Americans to sign up for the congressional health care plans that are negotiated by the federal government with insurers? It's still private insurance, but the insurers and the premiums are the best available.
3
No one is addressing the root of the problem - the high cost of health insurance. Senator Cruz wants to sell us watered down policies that will provide fewer benefits and that will let the insurance cos increase margins. If the cos keep one policy that provides the same care as the ACA the insurance cos will raise the cost and at some point these policies with better care will cease to exist. We're back to square one. Let's face it the ACA isn't perfect but it's better than what the GOP has.
1
Republicans STILL miss the point. Tax breaks aside (which predicate some magical triple fold explosion in the economy to make up for), they need answer the simple question "is healthcare a human right in this country?".
The other hidden problem with Trumpcare is the backhanded way it will make health insurance unaffordable for middle class Americans by the second year. Remember the little clause in McConnellcare where it states insurance companies will increase premiums 15% to 20% in the first two years There's no control mechanism to regulate rates. Insurance companies have increased their rates year over year regardless of ACA and with Trumpcare they're opening the gates even more.
To echo some sentiments amongst Republican Senators "we have no answers, the only other way is single payer".
The other hidden problem with Trumpcare is the backhanded way it will make health insurance unaffordable for middle class Americans by the second year. Remember the little clause in McConnellcare where it states insurance companies will increase premiums 15% to 20% in the first two years There's no control mechanism to regulate rates. Insurance companies have increased their rates year over year regardless of ACA and with Trumpcare they're opening the gates even more.
To echo some sentiments amongst Republican Senators "we have no answers, the only other way is single payer".
Tax-free savings accounts aren't all that useful if nearly all your money goes toward rent, let alone basic food, fuel to get to work and basic utilities. Clearly a proposal by people who have lots of disposable income. Why again do we have a bunch of wealthy, disconnected people make policy for the rest of us?
6
Apparently there is a reflex in the Republican nervous system that forces them to add upper income tax cuts to every new bill. If they ever declare nuclear war, there will probably be a rider to the declaration that lowers taxes for the Rich.
Could it be that this reflex has finally separated this response from the stimulus? We can hope.
Could it be that this reflex has finally separated this response from the stimulus? We can hope.
"Another proposal, championed by conservative Republican senators, would allow people to use money in health savings accounts to pay premiums for insurance policies, not just out-of-pocket health care expenses like co-payments and deductibles."
And in the tax reform debate, aren't they talking about "closing loop holes" and "broadening the base"? How would this proposal to expand health savings accounts be affected?
And in the tax reform debate, aren't they talking about "closing loop holes" and "broadening the base"? How would this proposal to expand health savings accounts be affected?
1
I think the credibility of the GOP is so thin and frail these days, coupled with the level of mistrust and double talk being so ramped, if the Almighty himself presented and backed any proposal by the GOP, most Americans just would not buy into it. The bigger problem isn't just the healthcare bill, it's the entire perception of the GOP administration. I don't think the Republican party was this hated and distrustful even during the Nixon era. Until they can turn things around to the point where they will begin to LISTEN and COMPROMISE with the Democrats, this country will continue to decline in a free fall and NOTHING will get accomplished. C'on people - starting thinking about ALL Americans for a change and not just that 1% who can afford anything, especially when it comes to healthcare. Thank you.
2
It seems that the GOP is listening and this is a good change that I welcome, and so should everyone who was outraged that the rich were getting breaks in the original draft. It is progress.
But the Senate bill will still result in 22 million people losing health care coverage. It will still result in skyrocketing premiums for seniors and substandard coverage for many others. Yes, the wealthy will lose a tax break, but the revision does nothing to improve health care....quite the opposite
2
The argument that seems most effective against the Republican plans is that they are all ultimately more expensive for the country as a whole. We will be a poorer nation and spend more on health care to get even less, while opening ourselves up to epidemics that start among the poor thrown off Medicaid and ending up in the rich, too. The republican plans try to ignore the ways in which we cannot go back to days when medicine was individual. One of those ways is out knowledge of how infectious disease travels and about "herd immunity." We can't unknow these things. Another is our knowledge of cost shifting; Ted Cruz tries to ignore it in his "plan" but it's obvious to everyone else that his "idea" is destined to destroy insurance. We can't lose this knowledge, no matter how rabidly anti-socialist we try to be.
2
McConnell will still push for a huuuge tax cut once he gets this bill passed. They will claim victory.
The money needed for health care can easily be found by cutting funding for the most worthless federal outlay, the military budget. This totally unproductive activity could easily be reduced by at least half. Why not?
1
McConnell is trying to use the GOP's promise to repeal Obamacare, which was passed in 2010, to fundamentally change Medicaid from the way it was set up in 1965. If the GOP was truly trying to fix Obamacare, they'd focus on the changes specifically made by the ACA 7 years ago, and not the way Medicaid was setup 52 years ago. None of these new proposals even address that issue. They continue to try to put lipstick on a pig, in order to appear to be addressing some of the bill's problems, yet never get to addressing the overhaul of the Medicaid program as it was originally devised. If this bill continues to contain language that places a per capita cap on spending, and ties future growth to the consumer price index, Medicaid will collapse. This will have devastating effects on the healthcare delivery system: nursing homes, in which 64 percent of its residents are dependent on Medicaid, and rural hospitals, who serve a largely older, poorer and sicker population than most hospitals, will close. Medical costs rise due to a multitude of factors, including the advancement of new technologies, techniques, and drugs. The link to the CPI ignores all of this and makes this a pure budgetary item; as if people who develop cancer, or have heart attacks, can be cost selective when they want to get better. Balderdash!
1
I held various healthcare positions over 40 years, mainly involved with negotiating lower pharmaceutical costs for hospitals and institutions across the country. I've seen data which indicated that federal dollars, in one way or another, paid up to 75 percent of all healthcare costs in this country. Whatever the actual number is, less hung up countries than ours have looked at their own data and concluded single payer is the best option. Add a reasonable income tax increase to federal funds already earmarked for healthcare, impose realistic cost savings programs and create a one size fits all national healthcare system. The world has figured out that capitalism applied to healthcare leads to inflated costs, massive waste, corruption and heart break. Congress: pretend the well-being of your children's children depends on the decisions you are now making. Because it does.
8
Health care reform should be a bipartisan effort. There are Senators on both sides willing to try. But there is no way that Democrats could expect negotiation in good faith with the current Republican leadership. Unless the Republicans first repeal and replace majority leader McConnell there cannot be meaningful Democratic participation in reform.
Well this is just PART of the tax cuts planned. One of these days they will figure out that tax cuts on the wealthy do little or nothing for growth, do not trickle down, increase the debt and the deficit and really hurt those who rely on certain government services to make ends meet. Drop all the tax cuts, and fund health care in a healthier way so that it is truly accessible to everyone.
2
Expecting all Republicans, including the "moderates" like Collins and Murjkowski, I decided to delay retirement until 65. In hopes that th3 GOP do not ravage both Medicare and Social Security. Which I expect them to do. They pass this bill, they have to get their tax cut from somewhere and that is from so called "entitlements". Yes, even this newspaper call them that. They are no longer the "third rail" of politics, if their bill passes.
It is bad enough to have to pay well over $800 a month fro a silver policy already, under the ACA, it will be far worse, paying over $1200 a month under the ACHA. Anyone who was planning early retirement, will probably do the same things, as I am.
Trump will get his "repeal and replace", and the GOP will get the tax cuts by "repeal and replace" Medicare and Social Security. Who knows? Maybe they will force retirees to work for their benefits, like they are planning to do fro Medicaid. Sort of eliminates the concept of retirement; dosn't it?
It is bad enough to have to pay well over $800 a month fro a silver policy already, under the ACA, it will be far worse, paying over $1200 a month under the ACHA. Anyone who was planning early retirement, will probably do the same things, as I am.
Trump will get his "repeal and replace", and the GOP will get the tax cuts by "repeal and replace" Medicare and Social Security. Who knows? Maybe they will force retirees to work for their benefits, like they are planning to do fro Medicaid. Sort of eliminates the concept of retirement; dosn't it?
17
Retirement for older Americans today is mostly Social Security or SS disability. Most in 60s who can still work, won't take SS until 70, since most have no pension. And they will keep working as long as they can after 70.
3
I honestly don't think you should worry about cuts to Medicare (which middle class voters have come to expect will be there for them). No politician would touch it with a ten-foot-pole. Beating up on poor people is more the Republicans' M.O.
Seven years of bemoaning and demonizing Obamacare....and they're just now discussing ways of how to undo it? The Republicans' rank incompetence at the job of governing never ceases to amaze. Incompetent, cruel, and bad for America. The only silver lining is if they fail because Americans will have better health care and they will have burned more weeks during which they could have been busy figuring out how to make America a cesspool.
84
"Senate Republicans May Give Up Tax Cut in Effort to Kill Fewer Americans"
Grand Old Patriotism 2017
Grand Old Patriotism 2017
231
So here's the problem: Let's pretend that I'm the CEO of a major defense contractor. I make a nice profit on wars, selling military materiel, etc.
I want/need lots of low-level types to act as cannon fodder. But if their Medicaid is cut, many of them will die off before I and my fellow CEOs can benefit from them. But, at the same time, I want those tax cuts. Is there a solution to my "problem"?
I want/need lots of low-level types to act as cannon fodder. But if their Medicaid is cut, many of them will die off before I and my fellow CEOs can benefit from them. But, at the same time, I want those tax cuts. Is there a solution to my "problem"?
@Socrates
Have you ever thought of opening up a T-Shirt shop ?
Have you ever thought of opening up a T-Shirt shop ?
1
Their whole reason for this bill is a tax cut.
Otherwise, what have they got?
Give us single payer, universal health care. Or give up!
Otherwise, what have they got?
Give us single payer, universal health care. Or give up!
295
OR - at the least - Work with the Democrats (taking the lead) and fix Obamacare. Much less work and starting with something that a lot of people like and can afford.
And be sure that the committee is bipartisan, contains women senators, and last but not least don't let McConnell in the room. Surprise him with something that is good.
And be sure that the committee is bipartisan, contains women senators, and last but not least don't let McConnell in the room. Surprise him with something that is good.
What a novel thought. Actually providing people healthcare in a healthcare bill and not a tax cut. Way to go Republicans.
23
Here we go again. As with the House bill - open 'negotiations' with something so comically evil that the next round of cruelty will look positively benevolent. After all - Americans will feel much better about being strangled slowly than hit between the eyes with a sledgehammer - right? Hand it to the Republicans ... no one does devious like they do.
144
Republicans are trying to make the senate BCRA more appealing
But all they are doing in secret is wheeling and dealing
which has nothing to do with health and healing.
This act is a massive tax break for the very rich disguised as a health care bill.
For the old, the sick, the addicted and poor it is a cruel and bitter pill.
And Senator Mitch McConnell is its shameless shill.
But all they are doing in secret is wheeling and dealing
which has nothing to do with health and healing.
This act is a massive tax break for the very rich disguised as a health care bill.
For the old, the sick, the addicted and poor it is a cruel and bitter pill.
And Senator Mitch McConnell is its shameless shill.
There are s many ways that republicans are trying to spin this. I am going to focus on one thing ; the opioid epidemic
The so called '' moderates '' ( there is absolutely no such thing as a republican moderate ~ total misnomer ) are demanding help for their states ( in particular because they are vulnerable to being voted out of office ) to deal with the crisis. ( especially since medicaid is going to be gutted )
The crisis has people right in their face and on the news 24\7. ( Unlike the slow moving pain and deaths of people going without health care coverage ~ at least THOSE people have the decency to do so in private, being out of sight and mind )
The devil(s) will be in he details, and mark me words, there will be a line item somewhere and somehow to create an offset. ( essentially downloading the cost to the poor and common folk )
Watch for it.
The so called '' moderates '' ( there is absolutely no such thing as a republican moderate ~ total misnomer ) are demanding help for their states ( in particular because they are vulnerable to being voted out of office ) to deal with the crisis. ( especially since medicaid is going to be gutted )
The crisis has people right in their face and on the news 24\7. ( Unlike the slow moving pain and deaths of people going without health care coverage ~ at least THOSE people have the decency to do so in private, being out of sight and mind )
The devil(s) will be in he details, and mark me words, there will be a line item somewhere and somehow to create an offset. ( essentially downloading the cost to the poor and common folk )
Watch for it.
73
Meanwhile, Jeff Sessions is pursuing a get tough/law & order initiative to throw more drug users in prison rather than getting them into treatment. If the real intent is a constructive effort to end the opiod epidemic it would help if the whole Republican establishment got on the same page.
1
I agree. There is something really fishy about the opioid epidemic as the face of GOP health reform.
Senator Al Franken said it best in his recent book: “I don’t know what’s going to happen going forward. Heck, I don’t even know what’s going to happen between the time I finish this book and the time you read it. But what I do know is this: anyone who trusts this Republican Party with the future of our national health care system simply hasn’t been paying attention.”
My sentiments exactly.
My sentiments exactly.
569
Al Franken seems to say it best a lot these days...
So, Republicans don't think men should pay for women's pregnancies, but people who are not addicted to drugs should pay for Opioid addicts? Why? Because they voted for Trump? Hypocritical!
254
"Republicans don't think men should pay for women's pregnancies"
True. They seem to forget that it takes a man's sperm to make a woman pregnant. Why should the sperm provider not pay for the outcome of that sperm meeting the ovum?
True. They seem to forget that it takes a man's sperm to make a woman pregnant. Why should the sperm provider not pay for the outcome of that sperm meeting the ovum?
3
One possible clue to what passes in the GOP for "thinking" might be gleaned from the fact that Rush Limbaugh had an opioid problem, but their is scant probability that he will ever become pregnant.
2
False equivalency . If we don't get control of the opioid addiction problem then one of these desperately ill people will be knocking your door down to steal what they can to get more.
How about they go back to their Top Sicrit Men's Only meeting room, start working on fixes to the existing ACA, and we'll let them slap a shiny new label on it.
Provided they remember "fix" meaning as in "repair, make more functional", not "neuter" and not "improperly game the outcome in favor of certain hidden parties"
It costs a lot of extra money and a lot of time to have the entire health care and medical insurance industry (and corporate HR departments) re-do all their systems to support changes in law.
So go incremental, GOP Senate, and you can put a new name on the faster, stronger ACA.
Provided they remember "fix" meaning as in "repair, make more functional", not "neuter" and not "improperly game the outcome in favor of certain hidden parties"
It costs a lot of extra money and a lot of time to have the entire health care and medical insurance industry (and corporate HR departments) re-do all their systems to support changes in law.
So go incremental, GOP Senate, and you can put a new name on the faster, stronger ACA.
3
its going to impact on all jobs related to health care and any other public service business. these corporations aren't going to do anyone any favors. people will not be able to pay and therefore not go to the doctor. medical care and prescription drugs will skyrocket but who will be buying? there will be all kinds of repercussions from crisis in the lives of the american people. families will go bankrupt. families will lose their property and savings. my mother had cancer. forget that. now that we can look forward to cuts in pensions and social security, how many more of us...millenials with low paid jobs, high rents and children, seniors will not be able to pay for themselves much less help out their children. the price of everything is crazy. I put myself through college and graduate school and raised a child with nothing from the father riding on pure grit. I own my own home. I am debtless. will I be able to pay my taxes? my daughter is struggling and so are all her friends. try dealing with day care, rents in nyc, dental care with $3000 for an implant....I don't think so. we are going as fast as we can in this administration that is disassembling the country and no one seems to be able to stop it. what crisis can think up next. how many of you feel like you going to flip out. thank you gop.
Here's what the dimwits in the GOP will never understand: The reason health care and health insurance costs in the US are so high compared to every other developed country is precisely because rather than in spite of the fact that our system is based on a for-profit model at both the insurer and provider level. They are so wedded, joined at the ideological hip so to speak, that 'free markets' (as if there truly ever were any) always do better than public provision that they will ignore any evidence, induce any train wreck, rather than admit what is plain to see empirically from the rest of the world: health care is better, cheaper, and more widely available when treated as a public utility provided for the publi good.
They can doll up the swine they call 'health care reform' (or whatever) howsoever they wish. The facts won't change to suit their imbecile theological devotion to 'free market' dogma.
They can doll up the swine they call 'health care reform' (or whatever) howsoever they wish. The facts won't change to suit their imbecile theological devotion to 'free market' dogma.
161
Theological devotion to "free market" dogma. That nails it. That names the problem. And now vee are to begin, as I recall the ending to Portnoy's Complaint.
I wish I could hit the Recommend button on this over and over.
1
Dimwits?? You really think that's lost on them? Keep in mind the ACA WAS a republican idea implemented first as Romneycare in Massachusetts exactly BECAUSE it cleverly disguised government-sponsored healthcare as a means to prop up the for-profit health insurance industry. This is the ultimate insanity in terms of republicans: the ACA FORCES people to buy insurance, and as such, just like with the defense spending they love, you'd think they'd be thrilled about the ACA in terms of their insurance exec buddies carving up a bigger pie.
1
The Republicans seem to underestimate how furious people are becoming about the cuts in Medicaid. Yes, it has been expanding and will need to continue to expand until we have universal coverage -- yes, even help for people being killed off by opiates. Everybody!
Just think, today the British announced that they were going to start allowing women of Northern Ireland to have free abortions. They have to pay for them now, but they can get them. Here in the US more and more women can't even get an expensive abortion!
We are really behind as a nation. We have every right to be angry.
Just think, today the British announced that they were going to start allowing women of Northern Ireland to have free abortions. They have to pay for them now, but they can get them. Here in the US more and more women can't even get an expensive abortion!
We are really behind as a nation. We have every right to be angry.
143
This is a horrific bill.
This thing is gonna pass. And the poor Trump voters deserve it.
16
GOP "may forgo" windfall tax-cut for the rich? THAT'S rich!
The attack on affordable healthcare is a sorry betrayal of millions of US voters, who stand to suffer from it, but the yoking of this attach on healthcare to a tax windfall for the rich is positively obscene.
Have they NO shame?
The attack on affordable healthcare is a sorry betrayal of millions of US voters, who stand to suffer from it, but the yoking of this attach on healthcare to a tax windfall for the rich is positively obscene.
Have they NO shame?
Sheer nonsense - buy a cheap plan and suddenly you are told you have cancer or other major health issue - then what? - too bad....
35
Then switch to a top-of-line plan with no pre-existing conditions exclusions. It'll bankrupt the system and force us into single-payer.
Wrong! Upon learning you have cancer or some other costly ailment, you switch immediately, and without any penalty to the best plan someone else's money can buy. Many thousands have discovered this method.
The best bet would be to find a plan which only covers pregnancy caused by an extra-terrestrial. It should be very inexpensive.
We are wasting so much time and energy on this. The rest of the world has figured it out. If we're "exceptional" why haven't we?
94
Because what we're exceptional at is giveaways to corporations.
2
We're "exceptional" in that we haven't.
From one level of idiocy to a higher one. Does Mitch McConnell perceive that some billionaire out there is thinking, "Okay, as long as people get tossed out of nursing homes, addicts don't get treatment, rape victims' fetuses don't get aborted, poor women (except my household help) don't get health care, I'm happy to keep paying taxes at the same rate that I might be paying them now"?
If that's the gist of his thinking, he doesn't belong in the Senate, he doesn't belong in government. He's ready for the looney bin.
If that's the gist of his thinking, he doesn't belong in the Senate, he doesn't belong in government. He's ready for the looney bin.
1
The bill has so many coverage loopholes the insurance may be essentially worthless.
84
That's the plan: the masses end up paying HUGELY, but for nothing.
How about forego tax cut, forgo health care cut, and forego the whole darned thing?
22
The Trump - Ryan - McConnell Health Plan,
AKA “Let’s Make America Great Again,”
AKA, “G-d Help the Rich, Poor People Can Beg.”
AKA “Let’s Make America Great Again,”
AKA, “G-d Help the Rich, Poor People Can Beg.”
11
Not enough! Bad is bad. Took 7 years to come up with that brilliant idea? All because they are envious of the previous administration? That and racism?
141
I wish we had smarter people running our government. The fact that McConnell even proposed this is absurd. He was basically like "let's try to kill all of the people who made Trump my boss."
45
We did, until Obama left office.
Now that the Republicans in Congress have had the vast majority of the country turn against them for this abomination of a bill, they will also lose the absolute last vestige of their support, the super-rich.
9
“It’s not equitable to have a situation where you’re increasing the burden on lower-income citizens and lessening the burden on wealthy citizens,” said Senator Bob Corker, Republican of Tennessee.
Isn't that what your party does in everything it proposes. all day, every day, and into the wee hours of the morning?
Isn't that what your party does in everything it proposes. all day, every day, and into the wee hours of the morning?
248
Someone is bound to say that the Democrats are only obstructing, and not providing positive ideas. However, if the tax cuts are removable from the bill, Center for American Progress has suggested a simple fix for Obamacare that should be acceptable to the Republicans.
https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/healthcare/news/2017/06/29/43520...
https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/healthcare/news/2017/06/29/43520...
5
As far as I am concerned, this merely tells me that Our August Senators (Republican, Democrat, or anything else) are missing the essential point:
"HEALTH ... CARE ... FOR ... EVERYONE."
A "health care bill" has absolutely nothing to do with taxing or not-taxing the rich. It only has to do with making sure that everyone can go to the doctor or to the hospital.
And, fundamentally, we have reached a turning-point on this issue, which our "white-haired political football players" have never in their lives had to face.
For the past twenty-five years, various entrepreneurs assured us that "for profit" health care was the way to go, and that "for profit" health insurance was the way to pay for it. (To be sure of it, the Frist family (owners of the Hospital Corporation of America) installed one of their sons as CEO, and their brother in the Senate.) Be that as it may, twenty-five years later, what do we have to show for this perverted social experiment? "F-A-I-L!!"
The "for-profit" model failed shareholders even as it completely failed patients. The flaws in the concept are intrinsic and cannot be rescued, but the industry tried anyway with the Affordable Care Act. When that didn't work, the present bill wants to give those industries billions of dollars in so-called "premium support" money, with NO strings attached.
Enough! This horse is DEAD! Stop feeding it hay!!
"HEALTH ... CARE ... FOR ... EVERYONE." The British did it. So can we.
"HEALTH ... CARE ... FOR ... EVERYONE."
A "health care bill" has absolutely nothing to do with taxing or not-taxing the rich. It only has to do with making sure that everyone can go to the doctor or to the hospital.
And, fundamentally, we have reached a turning-point on this issue, which our "white-haired political football players" have never in their lives had to face.
For the past twenty-five years, various entrepreneurs assured us that "for profit" health care was the way to go, and that "for profit" health insurance was the way to pay for it. (To be sure of it, the Frist family (owners of the Hospital Corporation of America) installed one of their sons as CEO, and their brother in the Senate.) Be that as it may, twenty-five years later, what do we have to show for this perverted social experiment? "F-A-I-L!!"
The "for-profit" model failed shareholders even as it completely failed patients. The flaws in the concept are intrinsic and cannot be rescued, but the industry tried anyway with the Affordable Care Act. When that didn't work, the present bill wants to give those industries billions of dollars in so-called "premium support" money, with NO strings attached.
Enough! This horse is DEAD! Stop feeding it hay!!
"HEALTH ... CARE ... FOR ... EVERYONE." The British did it. So can we.
103
And the British did it after being essentially bankrupted by WW2 and losing much of their empire post war. Yet they established The National Health Service. We, on the other hand, can't seem to find the resources or the will to do it.
What is wrong with these people? Have they no shame? If they dislike our country and our people so much why don't they go and establish a new nation for themselves? Perhaps a portion of Antarctica because they are so hellbent on destroying our planet too. Gee, in a few years it might be prime real estate and they'll be sitting pretty. Leave please. Please. Y'all are ruining it for the rest of us.
18
Somalia might be a good choice. No taxes, no strong central government. Just what they aspire to in this country.
Do we really know that opioid use rises the level of epidemic or is it just the shiny new thing to chase? How does it compare to the deaths from cancer, diabetes, heart disease, etc. This really smacks of some more repub sleight of hand, while the left hand dispenses money for drug treatment, the right one takes away the right to basic medical care for millions of people from those "run of the mill" diseases that will kill you just as dead.
40
Since the opioid "epidemic" is disproportionately in red states, they will cry their eyes out about it. When drug abuse was considered an urban, an disproportionate minority problem, the Republican prescription was Cold Turkey.
These guys will find a way to keep the parts of the ACA that benefit red states and junk the ones that benefit blue ones. The only answer is to block all of it or eliminate all federal help and force it back to the states.
These guys will find a way to keep the parts of the ACA that benefit red states and junk the ones that benefit blue ones. The only answer is to block all of it or eliminate all federal help and force it back to the states.
1
Opioid Crisis Denialist?
This is rich, Mitch. Really rich.
5
The headline says "Tax Cut" singular, but there are m,any cuts proposed in this bill. Weill they all be expunged?
Then again, if they follow Crux and Lee's proposal to offer a bronze plan and a bunch of inexpensive plans that only provide aspirin for $1.00 each and call it health care, they'll be able to save the tax cuts.
Then again, if they follow Crux and Lee's proposal to offer a bronze plan and a bunch of inexpensive plans that only provide aspirin for $1.00 each and call it health care, they'll be able to save the tax cuts.
6
"Senate Republicans may give up tax cut"...for now. After they bring this harmful bill over the finish line they will take up tax reform and try to reinstate the cuts then. They lie about how transparent they've been in moving this bill forward but, in a way, they are transparent because I can see right through them.
19
Perhaps the Republicans can now fumble to something they can pass, but I'm dubious. They are headed down the path of "See, we repeal Obamacare ... and replace it with a meaner Obamacare."
I don't see how this works for them in any way other than the utterly disgusting "see, we kept our promise ... we repealed Obamacare!"
This would be a farce, if it weren't for all the harm they will do.
I don't see how this works for them in any way other than the utterly disgusting "see, we kept our promise ... we repealed Obamacare!"
This would be a farce, if it weren't for all the harm they will do.
6
“It’s not equitable to have a situation where you’re increasing the burden on lower-income citizens and lessening the burden on wealthy citizens,” said Senator Bob Corker, Republican of Tennessee. “That’s not a proposition that is sustainable, and I think leadership knows that.”
Senator Corker reveals that the leadership DID think starving the poor to
fatten the rich was, and remains the American(Republcan) way.
Senator Corker reveals that the leadership DID think starving the poor to
fatten the rich was, and remains the American(Republcan) way.
16
You know Republicans are desperate to bury the Obama presidency when they're willing to give up a tax cut for the wealthy in order to destroy Obamacare. It's not going to work. Obama will forever be remembered as a decent, caring individual, who faced overt racism and obstructionism with equanimity and calm, who got Osama bin Laden and got us out of Iraq. He may not have accomplished everything his constituents hoped for, but he will leave a lasting legacy of grace and calm.
The donald and the GOP of this era in general? They will be remembered as hypocritical, power-hungry, greedy, and UN-AMERICAN. They should be ashamed of themselves calling themselves representatives of the people, but they feel no shame.
The donald and the GOP of this era in general? They will be remembered as hypocritical, power-hungry, greedy, and UN-AMERICAN. They should be ashamed of themselves calling themselves representatives of the people, but they feel no shame.
44
I don't trust them. As soon as they got the health bill, they'd shift to a tax cut.
12
SS Titanic, full steam ahead!
6
Allowing insurers to offer borderline "junk" plans that the ACA abolished will appease younger voters who feel invulnerable to a medical tragedy, and may encourage them to pay premiums for a false sense of protection. Instead of a government tax to encourage coverage, it's an insurer's tax on the foolish, and will do nothing to curb medical costs that rise when people like them default on their bill.
35
So basically: Let's destroy a workable health care system for no good reason...and shift the massive tax cuts for rich people to a time when the connection between the two is harder for the public to make. Meanwhile, because we've made a "concession," people will think it's okay.
Sick.
Sick.
27
it is all about the coverages: who get the surgery, the medicines, and devices.
1
If they're really thinking about letting the measly tax on investment income stay, they're also busy calling their fat-cat buddies and corporate donors and telling them not to worry, they'll giving them even bigger tax cuts when they get to tax reform.
28
After years of bashing the Affordable Care Act, talking about "death panels," telling us that he ACA is imploding, convening a secret backroom meeting of the "old white man" club to draft new legislation, then lying about what was in it, we're supposed to take the Republicans at their word now? We are supposed to believe that they have all suddenly obtained a conscience and are trying to not strip away what we have gained?
Trust is earned. Start trying to earn our trust by working with Democrats, and making sure that women have input. Demonstrate to us that you aren't still trying to pull the rug out from under millions of citizens for whom you work. Do these things in broad daylight. (Kudos to those senators who saw just how savage the bill is and would not commit.)
For a special segment of Republicans, and you know who you are, just remember that no matter what you do, you will never be able to erase the fact that Barack Obama was president.
Trust is earned. Start trying to earn our trust by working with Democrats, and making sure that women have input. Demonstrate to us that you aren't still trying to pull the rug out from under millions of citizens for whom you work. Do these things in broad daylight. (Kudos to those senators who saw just how savage the bill is and would not commit.)
For a special segment of Republicans, and you know who you are, just remember that no matter what you do, you will never be able to erase the fact that Barack Obama was president.
38
The GOP had seven years to prepare an alternative healthcare plan.
Instead, they spent the time railing against the black man in "their" White House.
Oh, how I miss President Obama.
Instead, they spent the time railing against the black man in "their" White House.
Oh, how I miss President Obama.
49
Republicans need to come clean with all of their real ideas about health care. The idea that you craft anything as comprehensive as health care without the input of both political parties, all of the affected entities (consumers, medical providers, insurance providers, state governments), and without open, public hearings is simply absurd nonsense.
So far, the only thing Republicans have offered is a bill designed to achieve genocide by killing off the poor, disabled and elderly so the wealthy can have a tax cut. That is simply immoral and unAmerican.
So far, the only thing Republicans have offered is a bill designed to achieve genocide by killing off the poor, disabled and elderly so the wealthy can have a tax cut. That is simply immoral and unAmerican.
5
What about the tax on Cadillac plans, which are aimed at union and government workers? It never made any sense to me to tax those who are provident and who indirectly pick up the costs of the uninsured.
What about the individual mandate? How can we have universal coverage without universal participation? The current bill delays insurance coverage for those who gone without it but those who pay their premiums will probably pick up the costs of the uninsured.
Now we get to arithmetic: how do the Republicans get to fifty. How can Capito, Murkowksi, Corker and Heller be bribed without alienating more reactionary senators? Rand, Cruz, and Cornyn already think that this bill is too humane.
What about the individual mandate? How can we have universal coverage without universal participation? The current bill delays insurance coverage for those who gone without it but those who pay their premiums will probably pick up the costs of the uninsured.
Now we get to arithmetic: how do the Republicans get to fifty. How can Capito, Murkowksi, Corker and Heller be bribed without alienating more reactionary senators? Rand, Cruz, and Cornyn already think that this bill is too humane.
5
The Republicans seem to have a strategy but not a real plan. Too bad they've forgotten how to govern.
1
? So the extreme right will like it even less than before, as will the average GOP, the moderate GOP still won't like it, and the dems are not going to vote for it. UNLESS, a lot of pork (public expense - so much for savings) is handed out, but can they even do enough 'political welfare' to get to 50?
1
They will keep on tweaking this law until it looks pretty much like Obamacare.
So it begs the question: Why not just spend the effort on fixing the current health care law of the land - The Affordable Care Act?
They can then focus instead on just changing the name to save face.
So it begs the question: Why not just spend the effort on fixing the current health care law of the land - The Affordable Care Act?
They can then focus instead on just changing the name to save face.
How about we make America great with Single Payer?
26
So Medicaid may not be totally defunded--yippee. How about reasesssing required coverage standards and elimination of sick 60 year olds going into medical bankruptcy.The call the mandate an automatic opt in, restore a gradual expansion of Medicare - and Voila! a plausible plan.
This seemingly minor decision could damage many more lives that any possible health bill could. There are millions of FAMILIES that need the jobs that will soon develop after a tax cut goes into force.
The Republican Congress has been stuck in Washington, D.C. so long that they are becoming just one more bunch of old guys.
The Republican Congress has been stuck in Washington, D.C. so long that they are becoming just one more bunch of old guys.
1
One year of Trump's budget increase for Defense would pay for 12 years of budget to fight the Opiate problem. Take care of Americans at home before we build more redundant weapons.
9
Exactly. They have to spend money to fight this opioid epidemic. The New Yorker had a tremendous report on this recently. So many children, particularly in West Virginia and Ohio, need help to get their parents off of these terrible drugs.
We will not get 'guaranteed gold-plated health insurance for all' - there's no sense asking for that. It isn't going to happen.
So in the meantime, why not concentrate on positive moves many (not all; discounting those who are disabled or otherwise unable) people can take to drive their own healthcare costs down? Maybe exercise more; maybe lose a few pounds by eating healthy, etc. Why not give it a try! I personally have done so, and know several people who have taken on a healthier lifestyle. Not everyone can; I totally get that. But not all of us are sick. Many are well, and can help bring down theirs and everyone's costs by taking good care of themselves. Think of it as a challenge! Feel better, save money - who wouldn't be on board with that? :)
Those of us in the individual market have suffered premium-wise. Frankly I see no way out but to be non-compliant. Obama lied to us when he said we could keep our insurance, if we liked it:
'According to NBC News, the Obama administration knew in July 2010 that more than 40 percent to 67 percent of people in the individual market would likely not be able to keep their existing policies.' https://ballotpedia.org/Health_insurance_policy_cancellations_since_Obam...
We will not get 'guaranteed gold-plated health insurance for all' - there's no sense asking for that. It isn't going to happen.
So in the meantime, why not concentrate on positive moves many (not all; discounting those who are disabled or otherwise unable) people can take to drive their own healthcare costs down? Maybe exercise more; maybe lose a few pounds by eating healthy, etc. Why not give it a try! I personally have done so, and know several people who have taken on a healthier lifestyle. Not everyone can; I totally get that. But not all of us are sick. Many are well, and can help bring down theirs and everyone's costs by taking good care of themselves. Think of it as a challenge! Feel better, save money - who wouldn't be on board with that? :)
Those of us in the individual market have suffered premium-wise. Frankly I see no way out but to be non-compliant. Obama lied to us when he said we could keep our insurance, if we liked it:
'According to NBC News, the Obama administration knew in July 2010 that more than 40 percent to 67 percent of people in the individual market would likely not be able to keep their existing policies.' https://ballotpedia.org/Health_insurance_policy_cancellations_since_Obam...
Whatever changes are proposed to sqeak this through with only GOP votes, it's still an effort to gut the health care. The effect on those depending on Obamacare will be the same.
Bribe and graft works every time with Senators.
Expand medicare and make it universal coverage for every citizen of the richest country of the world. I guess I am talking about US.
Expand medicare and make it universal coverage for every citizen of the richest country of the world. I guess I am talking about US.
5
Medicare requires each wage earner to pay a tax for many years before they are old enough to be covered by Medicare. Then if they don't buy Part B within 3 months of becoming age 65 they pay a progressively higher rate the longer they delay, for the rest of their lives. Obamacare allows people to delay buying insurance until they need it and does not impose any penalty for skipping a few years. You may pay a small tax but your insurance rate once you join, is the same as someone who signed up a decade earlier.
Anything decent they do on taxes now, they'll undo in tax reform next month.
4
No matter how they try to spin it, what they are proposing, leaving aside the tax cut absurdity, is NOT repealing Obamacare. The first time in my life I agreed with Rand Paul yesterday -- this bill does not repeal Obamacare. The basic structure stays as it is, just covering even fewer people, while drastically raising the costs for people over 50.
Also, who cares if you can afford a health plan, but the deductible will be $6,000? That's a worthless plan for 99% of the people.
Also, who cares if you can afford a health plan, but the deductible will be $6,000? That's a worthless plan for 99% of the people.
4
These are just more cynical attempts to fool the public. Even if the investment taxes stay in this bill, once the Republicans "tackle" the tax code, it's a good bet this will be offset with some other giveaway to the top 1%. As for incentives to use tax-free HSAs--seriously? Most poor people don't have money to save after taking care of life's basics, and tax-free doesn't matter much when you don't make enough money to pay taxes. The worst is this constant attempt at taking us back into the bad old days of the so-called "mini-med" plans, where premiums may be lower, but the benefits are almost non-existent--one trip to the ER would exceed the annual caps on most of them. That's why the ACA put essential health benefits in place to begin with--so one major medical event doesn't result in the thousands of medical bankruptcies suffered in the pre-ACA era.
15
I keep hearing the talk about adjusting the use of HSA to help cover premiums. If you don't have the money for the premiums, where will you get the money to put in an HSA?
This helps virtually no one that the original bill didn't help. Sham.
This helps virtually no one that the original bill didn't help. Sham.
14
"Senate Republicans Consider Leaving Tax on Rich in Health Bill." Does this mean that Senate Republicans are about to actually undertake real healthcare reform, instead of tax reform masquerading as healthcare reform? If McConnell is serious about such a proposal, then he should open up the process entirely and be ready to accept Democratic amendments. Of course, how the Senate's legislation could then be reconciled to the House legislation is a matter for another day.
1
Hope this increases calls for a rational universal health care system (Medicare for all with price controls) but not holding my breath. The elephant in the room: medical specialists, "nonprofit" hospital CEOS and pharmaceutical execs are in the top 1% and drive Mercedes, Lexuses and Tesslas --- while their incomes derive indirectly, securely and involuntarily from the 99% who pay taxes and insurance and ride around in Hondas, Priuses, Chevies and on bicycles and buses. Trump understands bracketing: aim high and settle for less. Dems should begin with a demand to let everyone under 35 buy into Medicaid and to expand Medicare to everyone under 50. Settle for a smaller start, Medicaid for the under-30s and Medicare for the under-55s. Force "nonprofit" health systems to limit CEO reimbursements and plow the money into preventive money-losing services like diabetes education and palliative care -- or lose their nonprofit status and pay taxes targeted tp defray medical costs.
One thing is clear: Trumpcare=Don'tCare, and RepubliCare=Don'tCare.
One thing is clear: Trumpcare=Don'tCare, and RepubliCare=Don'tCare.
3
I would be satisfied with no less than a single-payer plan, or "Medicare for All." This is what has to happen eventually.
5
Republicans have absolutely NO concept of what kind of healthcare system they are trying to build or preserve. They are tinkering – not heavy lifting - lurching from idea to idea trying to satisfy bumper sticker slogans rather than deliver healthcare.
There was a reason it took 14 months to develop ACA. It required thought.
There was a reason it took 14 months to develop ACA. It required thought.
17
Even Warren Buffet, the billionaire who makes all of his wealth from "capital gains," criticizes the disparity in tax rates between investors and people who do not have a lot of extra wealth for investing and instead must live through their labor. Taxes on labor are much higher than taxes on capital gains.
And think about it, if you have a lot of extra wealth -- wealth you can afford to invest and not spend for food, shelter, or even health insurance -- why should you get an even lower tax rate on that income from such investments than people who are working, and living pay check to pay check.
Yes, we should encourage people to save and invest as much as they can -- and this is why the ACA supplement, adding 3.8 percent to the capital gains -- is only for the wealthiest Americans.
Even still, it is not clear anymore how the low capital gains tax helps the American economy now. Investors are using their wealth to replace human jobs with machines, robots, computers. The investors get the windfall of being able to sell a product or service with fewer employees -- but the human laborers (who do not even have enough wealth the make investments like these) only lose their jobs as a result of these investments, which are essentially subsidized by the lower capital gains tax.
We should enable employees to earn ownership in the companies they work for -- ESOPs for example -- only these should have lower capital gains taxes.
And think about it, if you have a lot of extra wealth -- wealth you can afford to invest and not spend for food, shelter, or even health insurance -- why should you get an even lower tax rate on that income from such investments than people who are working, and living pay check to pay check.
Yes, we should encourage people to save and invest as much as they can -- and this is why the ACA supplement, adding 3.8 percent to the capital gains -- is only for the wealthiest Americans.
Even still, it is not clear anymore how the low capital gains tax helps the American economy now. Investors are using their wealth to replace human jobs with machines, robots, computers. The investors get the windfall of being able to sell a product or service with fewer employees -- but the human laborers (who do not even have enough wealth the make investments like these) only lose their jobs as a result of these investments, which are essentially subsidized by the lower capital gains tax.
We should enable employees to earn ownership in the companies they work for -- ESOPs for example -- only these should have lower capital gains taxes.
All of this unseemly scrambling could have been avoided if the Republican leadership had followed the norms they so vociferously proclaimed during a Democratic administration: debate, process, committee hearings, voices of specialists and ordinary Americans, compromise, inclusion across the aisle. Of course, a non-ideological understanding and compassion for lower and middle class Americans would have been helpful, but even now, is probably asking too much.
2
I think the best way of repealing Obamacare is to establish a single payer system to provide healthcare for all of Americans like other developed countries. Government manages the healthcare systems and kicks out the insurers who make a huge amount of profits from healthcare system. Employee and employers pay a proportionate money on the healthcare pool. The government manages this pool to offer healthcare to all. Healthcare is a right. It is not a privilege.
10
With $200 billion to pay around with, sounds like McConnell won't have much trouble finding the 5-6 Republican votes necessary to pass the bill.
$200 billion here, $200 billion there, and pretty soon, you're talking about real money....
Question - How can you sell a health insurance policy without coverage for "emergency services"?
Isn't that what insurance is for?
$200 billion here, $200 billion there, and pretty soon, you're talking about real money....
Question - How can you sell a health insurance policy without coverage for "emergency services"?
Isn't that what insurance is for?
5
Sure hope that this doesn't pass. It still decimates Medicaid, and who is served by offering more inadequate medical plans?
Thumbs down. Harriet
Thumbs down. Harriet
2
One key statement . . . "the change would make health savings accounts more attractive to people who could afford to put money into them."
"...who could afford...." and the others?
"...who could afford...." and the others?
10
My thoughts on tax free savings accounts benefit for the poor is, its hard to pull yourself up by the bootstraps when the rich guy took your shoes.
They need to take a serious look at what drives the cost so high. The cost of pharmaceuticals compared to other countries like Canada must be addressed, the inflated profits for the insurance companies must be reduced.
Medicaid needs to be protected too many infants, children and seniors rely on it as their life line. You could reduce half million veterans who rely on medicaid by switching their health tab over to the V.A. One in ten vets rely on Medicaid today and that is wrong.
Never discussed by certainly a cost factor is the health care cost that relates to the millions of obese Americans. We need programs to get everyone to trim down and get in shape. That alone would knock billions off our health care tab.
There is no justification for reducing taxes unless it will create a healthier American population.
They need to take a serious look at what drives the cost so high. The cost of pharmaceuticals compared to other countries like Canada must be addressed, the inflated profits for the insurance companies must be reduced.
Medicaid needs to be protected too many infants, children and seniors rely on it as their life line. You could reduce half million veterans who rely on medicaid by switching their health tab over to the V.A. One in ten vets rely on Medicaid today and that is wrong.
Never discussed by certainly a cost factor is the health care cost that relates to the millions of obese Americans. We need programs to get everyone to trim down and get in shape. That alone would knock billions off our health care tab.
There is no justification for reducing taxes unless it will create a healthier American population.
3
"its hard to pull yourself up by the bootstraps when the rich guy took your shoes."
Great way to say it!!!
Great way to say it!!!
1
There is virtually no chance that the Republicans will give up on the tax cut component, whatever they're saying publicly. That, to them, is the main reason for the entire exercise. Also, the group that they're most trying to please is the billionaire oligarchs who prop up their party with funding, and any "repeal and replace" bill that didn't include a tax cut for the wealthy would fail to pass muster with that group.
2
Starting to sound like a tweak to O-care. Now, put back the medicaid expansion and we'll be close to a deal.
4
All of these deals and even the legislation sound like a cafeteria plan of ideas to appease certain groups without any single compelling vision for healthcare in this Country.
We must start with a vision of what we want healthcare to look like in our society and its effects on people, and then work back to the details to implement that vision.
Instead, we get healthcare that implodes on the populace.
We must start with a vision of what we want healthcare to look like in our society and its effects on people, and then work back to the details to implement that vision.
Instead, we get healthcare that implodes on the populace.
2
Tax-free health savings accounts do not help poor people. When you don't have money to put aside in the first place, and you don't need a tax shelter, C'mon! It's not that complicated.
6
How much longer before we come to our collective senses and provide a public option, Medicare for everyone? These GOP senators are desperately trying to preserve a failing system that benefits a few companies at the expense of most Americans and the broader economy.
Maybe we can agree to bribe the executives, pay off the senators and retrain the displaced insurance workers? What's the bottom line required to get us to a sensible health care system?
Maybe we can agree to bribe the executives, pay off the senators and retrain the displaced insurance workers? What's the bottom line required to get us to a sensible health care system?
3
A smattering and spattering of healthcare amendments, all under deadline, with no comprehensive plan in place: Is there no real leadership in this government?
3
The GOP had seven years to prepare for this moment. They promised a plan that was cheaper and better, but after seven years they were still scrambling to come up with a plan.
Crooks, liars and con men.
Crooks, liars and con men.
1
Insurance is not a matter of "desire" but of NEED. Health care is a human right. So are shelter and food.
Single payer now.
Single payer now.
15
But by Republicans fixing parts of Obamacare and making it fairer and more benevolent while discarding the tax cut will greatly diminish the chances of Democrats taking control of Congress in 2018. And when discussing healthcare insurance what will liberal news media complain about?
1
You think that's what it's all about? Winning at the polls? How about we just care about good, fair, humane policies being enacted. If a republican ran on single payer health care, I, a liberal dem, would vote for them.
3
And this lowest the projected cost of a policy for anyone over 60 how, exactly?
31
It’s a disgrace that the US is the ONLY developed country that does not have universal coverage. Other countries implemented universal coverage decades ago:
https://truecostblog.com/2009/08/09/countries-with-universal-healthcare-...
Norway 1912…New Zealand 1938…Japan 1938…Germany 1941…Belgium 1945…United Kingdom 1948…Kuwait 1950…Sweden 1955…Bahrain 1957…Brunei 1958…Canada 1966…Netherlands 1966…Austria 1967…United Arab Emirates 1971…Finland 1972…Slovenia 1972…Denmark 1973…Luxembourg 1973…France 1974…Australia 1975…Ireland 1977…Italy 1978…Portugal 1979…Cyprus 1980…Greece 1983…Spain 1986…South Korea 1988…Iceland 1990…Hong Kong 1993…Singapore 1993…Switzerland 1994…Israel 1995
At least 20% of our health care dollars goes to insurance middlemen and 11% is spent on administrative waste on the provider end due to a multi-payer system. Medicare for all (similar to the Canadian system) is the way to go.
Real Canadians Talking Real Healthcare
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQFX32Ed7ZQ
Canadian Medicare for all:
-no bills
-no co-pays
-no deductibles
-no annual or lifetime caps
-no bankruptcies
-no insurance middlemen to override a doctor
-free to choose any doctor or hospital (unlike the US)
-much lower drug prices (Canada negotiates drug prices)
-everyone is covered at a fraction of the cost compared to the US while the US has tens of millions who are uninsured and underinsured
-better health outcomes than the US
-the vast majority of Canadians like their system
https://truecostblog.com/2009/08/09/countries-with-universal-healthcare-...
Norway 1912…New Zealand 1938…Japan 1938…Germany 1941…Belgium 1945…United Kingdom 1948…Kuwait 1950…Sweden 1955…Bahrain 1957…Brunei 1958…Canada 1966…Netherlands 1966…Austria 1967…United Arab Emirates 1971…Finland 1972…Slovenia 1972…Denmark 1973…Luxembourg 1973…France 1974…Australia 1975…Ireland 1977…Italy 1978…Portugal 1979…Cyprus 1980…Greece 1983…Spain 1986…South Korea 1988…Iceland 1990…Hong Kong 1993…Singapore 1993…Switzerland 1994…Israel 1995
At least 20% of our health care dollars goes to insurance middlemen and 11% is spent on administrative waste on the provider end due to a multi-payer system. Medicare for all (similar to the Canadian system) is the way to go.
Real Canadians Talking Real Healthcare
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQFX32Ed7ZQ
Canadian Medicare for all:
-no bills
-no co-pays
-no deductibles
-no annual or lifetime caps
-no bankruptcies
-no insurance middlemen to override a doctor
-free to choose any doctor or hospital (unlike the US)
-much lower drug prices (Canada negotiates drug prices)
-everyone is covered at a fraction of the cost compared to the US while the US has tens of millions who are uninsured and underinsured
-better health outcomes than the US
-the vast majority of Canadians like their system
588
Bravo, RLS! Thanks for that very thorough and informative comment.
4
@RLS
Aye, very much so. My family likes it.
My inlaws, my neighbors, the people down the block and so on and so forth
We are a healthy and happy bunch because of it .
Sorry.
Aye, very much so. My family likes it.
My inlaws, my neighbors, the people down the block and so on and so forth
We are a healthy and happy bunch because of it .
Sorry.
5
So many presidents over the years have wanted a national healthcare system, including Truman and even Nixon - ! What is our problem? Are we all Marlboro men, determined to tough it out alone? We are the only ones left without a single-payer system!
I haven't seen a doctor in over 10 years and take no meds, yet I reluctantly purchase healthcare, which I can ill afford. I just want sensibly-priced insurance that will be there when I need it. And I want people who are desperately ill to be able to obtain relief without the stress of losing their home/bankruptcy.
I haven't seen a doctor in over 10 years and take no meds, yet I reluctantly purchase healthcare, which I can ill afford. I just want sensibly-priced insurance that will be there when I need it. And I want people who are desperately ill to be able to obtain relief without the stress of losing their home/bankruptcy.
4
The decision will be made by the GOP's billionaire oligarchs. If they're willing to forego a trillion dollar tax cut (which I find hard to believe), word will be sent to McConnell and it will happen. Talking to McConnel and Cornyn is kind of a silly exercise because they're just waterboys. The Times should talk to the Chamber of Commerce and Heritage Foundation and the Kochs to find out what the next step is
229
@Tom
It's a tried and true strategy by republicans.
Pull extreme right
Pull extreme right
Pull extreme right
Pull extreme right
Come back a millimeter to appear '' moderate ''
Get great press ( 4th estate fall over themselves looking for bipartisanship )
Add then go back to their default position
Pull extreme right
Pull extreme right
Pull extreme right
Pull extreme right
It's a tried and true strategy by republicans.
Pull extreme right
Pull extreme right
Pull extreme right
Pull extreme right
Come back a millimeter to appear '' moderate ''
Get great press ( 4th estate fall over themselves looking for bipartisanship )
Add then go back to their default position
Pull extreme right
Pull extreme right
Pull extreme right
Pull extreme right
7
Democratic Party oligarchs are still looking in the mirror wondering what happened to all the votes the billion-plus they gave Hillary was supposed to result in; and the thirty-million-plus they blew on the Ossoff campaign.
A trillion-dollar tax cut would ALMOST erase the Obama tax hikes. The one thing you always remember about Democrat presidents is the explosion in government taxation and spending they always bring about.
A trillion-dollar tax cut would ALMOST erase the Obama tax hikes. The one thing you always remember about Democrat presidents is the explosion in government taxation and spending they always bring about.
1
And GOP cuts taxes then still spends (e.g., endless wars).
1
Nice start. Don't repeal the tax, and don't gut Medicaid either.
Instead, take a look at the bloated DoD budget and stop sending troops to fight in the Middle East, above all to Afghanistan.
Then maybe you'll have the money you need to work on infrastructure and job training programs to provide jobs for the long-term unemployed.
Instead, take a look at the bloated DoD budget and stop sending troops to fight in the Middle East, above all to Afghanistan.
Then maybe you'll have the money you need to work on infrastructure and job training programs to provide jobs for the long-term unemployed.
364
YES...
But then the multi-millionaires who have gorged themselves on the "Defense" contracting racket will stop bribing -- I mean supporting -- them with campaign "donations".
But then the multi-millionaires who have gorged themselves on the "Defense" contracting racket will stop bribing -- I mean supporting -- them with campaign "donations".
2
So offer a bribe to Senators who want to show concern for populations suffering from narcotics who are considered to be "deserving"
80
@Ben
Right, Always a good idea to pay members of Congress for their votes in lieu of supporting policies that help people within their districts\the country. It's not like the tax payer wouldn't mind using their money for such an exercise.
Sometimes, I wonder is social studies is still being taught in school,
SMH
Right, Always a good idea to pay members of Congress for their votes in lieu of supporting policies that help people within their districts\the country. It's not like the tax payer wouldn't mind using their money for such an exercise.
Sometimes, I wonder is social studies is still being taught in school,
SMH
7
You might take note that the opioid epidemic at its most virulent in Republican lead states.
4
People have alot of problems in this country and no amount of money is going to cure all of them. So, your smug attitude avoids realities and hard choices. But hey, you must be so proud of yourself.
2
So Republicans are considering an ethical tax policy just to try to lure votes on an unethical healthcare bill! Here's another idea: make a fair tax rate, and leave us with guaranteed healthcare.
291
About half of Americans do not pay any income taxes so when you say "fair" I guess you mean everyone pays at least a flat rate to begin with. Perhaps 10 percent?
2
SInce we are talking about health care and FICA - you might want to consider that everyone with a w-2 starts out with a flat tax of 15.3% to support aged care and aged medical care and as insurance from SSI disability...
3
Let's just institute a national health service like Great Britain has and get it over with.
635
Its massively expensive, but if you are willing to pay a 95% tax rate then we can try. Problem is most Americans and likely you too want everything for free.
2
@Michael
Much rather prefer the system Canada has. The government contracts out to private organizations ( if need be ) to offer care quicker. The NHS is a top down government owning everything system.
Either way, leaps and bounds better, more efficient and costing less than the yanks. A good thing.
Much rather prefer the system Canada has. The government contracts out to private organizations ( if need be ) to offer care quicker. The NHS is a top down government owning everything system.
Either way, leaps and bounds better, more efficient and costing less than the yanks. A good thing.
1
Or preferably one like Switzerland, which is well-funded, works better, and not under assault.
The NHS is under attack now.... by the Tories, of course. After years of purposefully under-funding it and scapegoating it as cause of deficits, May and her gang are now attacking it using all sorts of deplorable tactics.
The NHS is under attack now.... by the Tories, of course. After years of purposefully under-funding it and scapegoating it as cause of deficits, May and her gang are now attacking it using all sorts of deplorable tactics.
6
Republicans, don't just tell me there are ways to minimize the risk of healthy people signing up for less expensive insurance leaving the expensive policies for sicker individuals. Tell me, explicitly, what those ways are. You said that you had a better health care plan but when the chips were down, you couldn't produce it. I am skeptical that you have ways to minimize this risk too. Can't imagine why I feel that way.
387
@ExPatMX
Perhaps you were not aware of how republicans ( in general ) are masters of the bait and switch ?
They tell you what you want to hear so you elect them
They get elected
They take away things from you to pay for things for them\backers
It's not like this has not been done over and over and over again.
Perhaps you were not aware of how republicans ( in general ) are masters of the bait and switch ?
They tell you what you want to hear so you elect them
They get elected
They take away things from you to pay for things for them\backers
It's not like this has not been done over and over and over again.
18
The real issue is Republicans dont want to pay for poor Democratic voters flooding across the borders. It is an ideological war that you just dont get.
2
I'm not the least but skeptical. I know a lie when I see it.
3
And that's "tax," not "taxes" because most of the cuts are still in the bill.
111