So there is such a thing as "Fake News" then. Thought so.
3
Putin's puppet and republicans are trying to erase all of Obama's legacy. They don't care if they bring harm to countless Americans. It's all about serving the rich and putting our first African American president in his place.
14
McDonnell and his party are not just so blinded by their rage against Obamacare, they blinded by their rage against Obama only because President Obama is black, or half black.
8
There is a way to get Republicans to accept the ACA. Make a few cosmetic changes *and some fixes that need to be made) and then label it the Trump-Ryan-McConnell Freedom Health Plan. Then they won't have to be enraged that a black man had the audacity to become president and then save thousands of lives.
11
It's so ridiculous when we have Dems & GOP house & senate reps who are supposedly looking out for the best interest of ALL the people, yet they are making these decisions when ACA does not even affect them in any way (except if their constituents get p.o.d & threaten not to vote for them in their next election). The problem is all the perks & lifetime best insurance & pensions they all get, so they have no clue about the struggles of folks without health plans provided by their employers. It has been said over & over again, we need to get these pain in the butt do nothing politicians to be put in the position that the decisions they make & the votes they make that hurt the majority of Americans also bites them in their fat lazy butts. When their bad & very negative decisions & votes start to impact them personally then maybe we will have some positive action in DC. Frankly, I'm not optimistic since we have become a nothing more than an oligarchy with many crypto-fascists controlling everything.
6
And you only hear a faint response from the DNC whenever the GOP makes this bogus claim. This is why the Democrats fail all the time- they are weak and timid and never get mad and fight dirty. I miss Weiner- I miss Spitzer -- yes yes their transgressions bla bla bla .. but at least they had some fight in them... The DNC is just a bunch of whinny little snowflakes waiting for the next poetry slam or drum circle- There is not a single House or Senate member who hits below the belt and the "High Ground" may the morally right place to be- but it ain't winning elections. So start slinging mud and fight dirty!
6
Lies lies and more lies to tarnish the work and efforts of a man who though imperfect helped provide millions in the country access to healthcare tht they never had before. Anything to tarnish and erase Obama's legacy. Greed and spite. They are sickening and terrible human beings who's only motivation is to take back from the people anything that is good. They care nothing about their constituents who cannot pay to keep them in power. They need to remember their oath to ALL of the people and our constitution. I am hoping that those who can change their vote will wake up and do so. The Koch's only get two votes. Money does not make their vote any more important according to our forefathers who did everything they could to void this. Again, sickening.
5
What a pity we have forgotten that universal single payer would be much cheaper-- and what a pity..that we are not reining in costs and getting rid of fraud-- a billion dollar fraud reported today...
Plenty wrong with Romneycare.. namely that there is an entire layer of middle men./parasites/leeches. (fire em all and give em welfare-- we'll all end up paying lower taxes... (Unfortunately privatization means the gov pays for everything plus.)
Plenty wrong with Romneycare.. namely that there is an entire layer of middle men./parasites/leeches. (fire em all and give em welfare-- we'll all end up paying lower taxes... (Unfortunately privatization means the gov pays for everything plus.)
If Obamacare is working so well, then why does the only coverage available to my family cost more per month than we make?? How in the world is that "not collapsing, imploding or exploding"??
6
To the headline message: perhaps so, but WHY DO WE NOT HEAR THIS FROM THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, the alleged supporters of the ACA?
Obama is a wonderful man, a gifted campaigner, and a horrifically bad politician, and the Democratic party continues to run his playbook on selling the ACA -- SILENCE and completely ceding the field to the Republican playbook.
Absolute idiocy.
Obama is a wonderful man, a gifted campaigner, and a horrifically bad politician, and the Democratic party continues to run his playbook on selling the ACA -- SILENCE and completely ceding the field to the Republican playbook.
Absolute idiocy.
8
Single payer.
Time to join the rest of the developed world.
Time to join the rest of the developed world.
10
Will the fever of Obama Derangement Syndrome ever break? Will the GOP not stop until every Obama-era law is undone?
9
To make a change, you must sell the dysfunction of the status quo.
Obama sold it successfully because people could not afford insurance and were relegated to emergency room disasters.
That was a real life and death thing. Now McConnell is selling "broken" because he wants to change it.
The freaking Republicans want to give up, they want to give up the idea that 18-percent of our economy is not enough to enable everyone to get insured.
Why? Why, this giant leap backwards for America? Because they are quitters. We are here. No pre-existing conditions. People struggling can get help.
Massage it, tweek it, but don't give an inch backwards! Republican leaders are quitters, grifters for insurance companies, and they must go.
Obama sold it successfully because people could not afford insurance and were relegated to emergency room disasters.
That was a real life and death thing. Now McConnell is selling "broken" because he wants to change it.
The freaking Republicans want to give up, they want to give up the idea that 18-percent of our economy is not enough to enable everyone to get insured.
Why? Why, this giant leap backwards for America? Because they are quitters. We are here. No pre-existing conditions. People struggling can get help.
Massage it, tweek it, but don't give an inch backwards! Republican leaders are quitters, grifters for insurance companies, and they must go.
15
None of the plans other than Medicare for All do anything about the biggest problem facing healthcare in the US, out of control rising prices. Only with Medicare for Everyone can we ensure every doctor, provider, hospital and clinic is "in network" for everyone. And only with negotiated prices and fees can we get control of costs and have a hope of stopping the current price gouging where we pay so much more than anywhere else for the same Rx Meds, medical devices, etc. Saying that our healthcare is better than any of the other developed nations that provide for everyone within their borders is a myth long since proved to be false. We simply are the victims of capitalist greed run amok. With Medicare for All, negotiated prices and supplemental insurance to cover what Medicare doesn't pay we can extend our existing infrastructure to provide everyone with great healthcare for less overall cost just like President Trump promised.
15
With Medicare for All the poor would have Medicaid to pick up the deductibles and co-pays they could not afford, just as it works now for those on Medicare. Those more well off would have the option of buying supplemental insurance just like it works for those on Medicare today too. Hopefully with single-payer for everyone we would also be smart enough to have negotiated prices for assisted living and nursing homes too along with investments to make delivery of services better and more affordable. And even get back to supporting medical research and education to move us up from 105th in doctors per capita, while also providing telemedicine and other improvements necessary to ensure more rural areas are well served with healthcare too.
9
Agreed.
One thing I have asked about repeatedly but no one has answered is if we have a single payer does that mean that the medical treatment folks get through auto no-fault and the workers compensation are then covered by the single payer system? If so the savings to all Americans on auto insurance (and we all know the fraud in the no-fault system is not only endemic it is standard operating procedure) as well as the savings to businesses on workers comp insurance would more than pay for the costs to the federal government.
I do not understand the reluctance by average Americans to a single payer system.
One thing I have asked about repeatedly but no one has answered is if we have a single payer does that mean that the medical treatment folks get through auto no-fault and the workers compensation are then covered by the single payer system? If so the savings to all Americans on auto insurance (and we all know the fraud in the no-fault system is not only endemic it is standard operating procedure) as well as the savings to businesses on workers comp insurance would more than pay for the costs to the federal government.
I do not understand the reluctance by average Americans to a single payer system.
9
The accompanying picture of the young women holding up a sign reading, "save ACA, then make it better, Medicare for all", demonstrates the disconnect between the Democratic electorate and the Democratic Party politicians.
ACA was designed to keep the lecherous private insurers in the game by forcing them to stop some of their more odious policies and granting them huge subsidies. This unleashed a period of consolidation in the industry, strengthening that sector, and increasing its lobbying might - and that power will surely be used to fend off any future attempts at a single payer system.
ACA and Medicare for all are like oil and water.
ACA was designed to keep the lecherous private insurers in the game by forcing them to stop some of their more odious policies and granting them huge subsidies. This unleashed a period of consolidation in the industry, strengthening that sector, and increasing its lobbying might - and that power will surely be used to fend off any future attempts at a single payer system.
ACA and Medicare for all are like oil and water.
7
Depicting the ACA as a "disaster" , among other descriptive, has been part of the brilliant conditioning plan by the Far Right wing of the GOP. Repeat a key phrase or interject a key word as often as possible over an extended period of time. At a certain point, those who support you will take it at face value; facts need not apply. That is not to say the ACA is not flawed but the death nail crisis scenario the Far Right purports is far from reality. Sadly, it is all too real that the Far Right wing will sacrifice anyone and anything, other than themselves, to give the top 5% of the population what it wants.
9
As long as insurance companies are part of the equation, skimming as they do providing zero value to any policy, ACA will fail without large subsidies from the taxpayer to increase profits along the way.
Single-payer sans insurance companies is the only sensible solution, especially given the extremes drive the center--average--of policy costs ever higher as drug and technology costs increase for those in most desperate need of healthcare.
Of course this won't happen, Connecticut would disappear overnight and Congress would be left to find other means of financing future campaigns.
Single-payer sans insurance companies is the only sensible solution, especially given the extremes drive the center--average--of policy costs ever higher as drug and technology costs increase for those in most desperate need of healthcare.
Of course this won't happen, Connecticut would disappear overnight and Congress would be left to find other means of financing future campaigns.
14
"Many Americans who do not get health insurance through employers have been frustrated with the marketplaces." - Being denied coverage for an insignificant 'pre-existing condition' was far more frustrating!
"The launch of HealthCare.gov by the Obama administration was disastrous." - Long since fixed.
"And the insurance policies have high deductibles and premiums that are unaffordable to many people, because the law did not provide enough subsidies to middle-income families." - Quite fixable.
"Insurers did a poor job designing their policies and suffered big losses initially, forcing them to raise premiums even more." - Also quite fixable.
It's just too bad that the Republicans want to destroy a huge chunk of the economy, one which is of supreme importance to the average American, just to get back at Obama.
"The launch of HealthCare.gov by the Obama administration was disastrous." - Long since fixed.
"And the insurance policies have high deductibles and premiums that are unaffordable to many people, because the law did not provide enough subsidies to middle-income families." - Quite fixable.
"Insurers did a poor job designing their policies and suffered big losses initially, forcing them to raise premiums even more." - Also quite fixable.
It's just too bad that the Republicans want to destroy a huge chunk of the economy, one which is of supreme importance to the average American, just to get back at Obama.
15
The health insurance companies are doing great!
I just looked up the stock valuations of the 5 largest publicly traded, United Health, Aetna, Anthem, Cigna and Humana. Over the last 5 years (since about the time the ACA went into effect) they have increased in value by 221% to 306%. For reference, the S&P 500 has increased 81% in that same time frame.
In short, they are making money hand over fist, as are their investors. Of course, they're not going to admit that publicly. It's their job to make as much money as possible. They do this, in part, by claiming to the government they are in dire straights, so as to squeeze out ever more concessions, tax breaks, subsidies, etc.
I wish I'd had the foresight to invest in health insurance stocks when Obamacare came into effect.
I just looked up the stock valuations of the 5 largest publicly traded, United Health, Aetna, Anthem, Cigna and Humana. Over the last 5 years (since about the time the ACA went into effect) they have increased in value by 221% to 306%. For reference, the S&P 500 has increased 81% in that same time frame.
In short, they are making money hand over fist, as are their investors. Of course, they're not going to admit that publicly. It's their job to make as much money as possible. They do this, in part, by claiming to the government they are in dire straights, so as to squeeze out ever more concessions, tax breaks, subsidies, etc.
I wish I'd had the foresight to invest in health insurance stocks when Obamacare came into effect.
13
We should all thank the Good Lord for our nation's free-market, profit-driven health care system. Sure, some unhealthy losers may have to be sacrificed for the better corporate good. And we'll likely never see a cure for cancer and other illnesses because that would wreak havoc on the revenues of big pharma and treatment centers that now reap billions off desperate losers left with no viable recourse.
But most important, speculators, Wall Street bankers and politicians will continue to get rich rolling the dice in our great transactional economy that rewards people for adding no value whatsoever to its products or services.
God bless America.
But most important, speculators, Wall Street bankers and politicians will continue to get rich rolling the dice in our great transactional economy that rewards people for adding no value whatsoever to its products or services.
God bless America.
6
Not recognizing the widespread bailing of providers as Destabilizing, borders on delusional. Just today Alaska now only has one provider leaving all Alaskans, regardless of political leanings, ZERO choice. Keep obstructing Republicans and we might get what we wish for and in this healthcare issue, the ACA will truly be a disaster.
"But Mr. McConnell and his party have become so blinded by their rage against Obamacare that they are losing sight of what ought to be their goal: safeguarding the health of their constituents."
Ah, but there's the rub.
They never wanted to "safeguard" the health of their constituents in the first place, and now they have essentially been "shamed" into offering "something" because they've been yelling and promising their precious base about how they could do better for seven years and counting.
As a result, what they have been forced into doing would be hilarious if it weren't so deadly serious. They are trying to come up with the "worst" possible plan that the few moderates among them can choke down, but time and time again it's not "bad" enough for the ideological fanatics like Rand Paul who want to provide nothing at all.
They are all infected with a moral sickness that the best health plan in the world couldn't come close to fixing.
Ah, but there's the rub.
They never wanted to "safeguard" the health of their constituents in the first place, and now they have essentially been "shamed" into offering "something" because they've been yelling and promising their precious base about how they could do better for seven years and counting.
As a result, what they have been forced into doing would be hilarious if it weren't so deadly serious. They are trying to come up with the "worst" possible plan that the few moderates among them can choke down, but time and time again it's not "bad" enough for the ideological fanatics like Rand Paul who want to provide nothing at all.
They are all infected with a moral sickness that the best health plan in the world couldn't come close to fixing.
14
It's not rage against Obamacare so much as it is rage against Obama. He's black, you know.
12
The problem is psychologicaL as well as political and economic. I don't know why the claim continues to crop up that Trump's supporters are voting against their own best interests.
Their best interests are in savaging Obamacare, Obama, the liberals, the elites, the conspirators, the snowflakes, the globalists and anything and everything that their approval has tainted. And if Trump's supporters have to pay for it or even die for it, well -- it's a war against evil and wars require sacrifice.
Hatred is a powerful motivation and if Trump's idolators, which include the 84% of Republican voters who believe he's doing a good job, have any doubts Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity over at Fox will explain why they shouldn't.
Their best interests are in savaging Obamacare, Obama, the liberals, the elites, the conspirators, the snowflakes, the globalists and anything and everything that their approval has tainted. And if Trump's supporters have to pay for it or even die for it, well -- it's a war against evil and wars require sacrifice.
Hatred is a powerful motivation and if Trump's idolators, which include the 84% of Republican voters who believe he's doing a good job, have any doubts Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity over at Fox will explain why they shouldn't.
2
"But Mr. McConnell and his party have become so blinded by their rage against Obamacare that they are losing sight of what ought to be their goal: safeguarding the health of their constituents."
It's not that McConnell and friends are in a rage. They just want to give their donors another humongous tax break.
It's not that McConnell and friends are in a rage. They just want to give their donors another humongous tax break.
5
It's called killing two birds with one stone!!
1
Obamacare markets are stable? I guess if you are the NYT Editorial Board the absence of any providers at all in a number of areas of the country is one form of stability . . . .
4
You hate it that ACA has saved many lives?
Why?
Why?
3
@Randall: You cannot acknowledge that some folks have been hurt by Obamacare's so called premiums. They are based on income level with no option to purchase just catastrophic coverage with well care paid out of pocket. No, full coverage must be purchased with relatively high deductibles.
Generally liberals see those negatively impacted by their policies as just so much collateral damage. Please do keep it up.
Generally liberals see those negatively impacted by their policies as just so much collateral damage. Please do keep it up.
4
He actually said something about the lack of insurance providers in certain sections of the country, a valid point even if you disagree with him.
To say he hates that the ACA has saved lives is nonsensical.
Can't you read?
To say he hates that the ACA has saved lives is nonsensical.
Can't you read?
2
Whether the system set up by the previous administration is becoming too expensive or not, insurance options for all was decided by a majority of voters, Dems and Reps, as a necessary part of our society - and it was instituted by Obama. Why the NYT, alongside Democratic senators, strategists, etc., keeps using the jargon of imploding, etc. when referring to the first iteration of healthcare insurance offered by the government boggles my mind. Remember a very short time ago when Republicans simply vowed to dismantle the ACA? Where are the reminders of that? Obamacare, no matter how it is changed, no matter what version comes next, will always be groundbreaking in our country, even if plans change and cost sources change, it is still government offered insurance, an idea that Republicans fought against.
Why does the NYT even call it Obamacare when that was a derogatory title assigned it by its opponents? The use of that name will never have anyone on the other "side" convinced of anything. Contemplating that Obama's legacy will be destroyed feeds into others' ideas. Trump's legacy of denying government offered healthcare of offering a product that makes the wealthy wealthier is being created - that should be reiterated again and again, in headlines and in text.
Why does the NYT even call it Obamacare when that was a derogatory title assigned it by its opponents? The use of that name will never have anyone on the other "side" convinced of anything. Contemplating that Obama's legacy will be destroyed feeds into others' ideas. Trump's legacy of denying government offered healthcare of offering a product that makes the wealthy wealthier is being created - that should be reiterated again and again, in headlines and in text.
9
In 1950 the nation spent less than 1/2% of the GDP for medical care.
Now medical care costs are over 18% of the GDP, growing rapidly, and predicted to be 20% in the next few years. How much can the nation afford to spend on Medical Care before the nation becomes bankrupt?
I am a fiscal conservative, but I am now in favor of National Socialized healthcare, like the European “Nanny States,” rather than rely on local taxpayers to pay for US citizens and illegal immigrants without insurance.
US taxpayers are already paying for most of the nation’s healthcare right now. Local taxes create and support local free hospitals (ala our Harris County Hospital District taxes here in Houston, Texas) providing free medical care for the poor that cannot otherwise afford medical care or do not have insurance.
Free Medical Care seems to now be considered to be a government taxpayer provided right, like Freedom of Speech and the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness!
There are real limits to how much can the taxpayers afford to pay for any kind national taxpayer paid for healthcare in addition to other government activities before the US nation becomes bankrupt!
People wanting free medical treatment for sex change surgery, drug overdoses, mental health issues, addictive drug treatment, cosmetic surgery, experimental surgery, abortions, artificial insemination and/or fertilization treatments could pay for it themselves or not have the taxpayers pay for it.
Now medical care costs are over 18% of the GDP, growing rapidly, and predicted to be 20% in the next few years. How much can the nation afford to spend on Medical Care before the nation becomes bankrupt?
I am a fiscal conservative, but I am now in favor of National Socialized healthcare, like the European “Nanny States,” rather than rely on local taxpayers to pay for US citizens and illegal immigrants without insurance.
US taxpayers are already paying for most of the nation’s healthcare right now. Local taxes create and support local free hospitals (ala our Harris County Hospital District taxes here in Houston, Texas) providing free medical care for the poor that cannot otherwise afford medical care or do not have insurance.
Free Medical Care seems to now be considered to be a government taxpayer provided right, like Freedom of Speech and the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness!
There are real limits to how much can the taxpayers afford to pay for any kind national taxpayer paid for healthcare in addition to other government activities before the US nation becomes bankrupt!
People wanting free medical treatment for sex change surgery, drug overdoses, mental health issues, addictive drug treatment, cosmetic surgery, experimental surgery, abortions, artificial insemination and/or fertilization treatments could pay for it themselves or not have the taxpayers pay for it.
12
I recced your comment because I liked that you're a self-styled fiscal conservative who has come to realize (as I am hoping more GOP will also come to realize) that single payer could work to save the entire country -- government and its citizens -- tons of money.
Unfortunately you offhandedly comment that those with mental health issues should "pay for it themselves", grouping it along with addiction and artificial insemination. Oh well, I guess you are the actual "nanny state" -- and a judgmental nanny at that.
Unfortunately you offhandedly comment that those with mental health issues should "pay for it themselves", grouping it along with addiction and artificial insemination. Oh well, I guess you are the actual "nanny state" -- and a judgmental nanny at that.
3
If you know anything about healthcare, you'll know that in your so called "European Nanny States" healthcare system is not close to free. People pay taxes to have access to healthcare, lots of it!! Way more than what the average American whines about.
And the biggest reason costs are ballooning is not the ACA but our aging population, eagerness to deploy new fancy tech on a large scale and the ridiculously fragmented for profit system that we cherish so much in the name of free market and freedom of states.
As one health economist recently predicted, we will go in circles until we come to our senses and realize that a single payer system with a progressive tax structure is the most reasonable option.
And the biggest reason costs are ballooning is not the ACA but our aging population, eagerness to deploy new fancy tech on a large scale and the ridiculously fragmented for profit system that we cherish so much in the name of free market and freedom of states.
As one health economist recently predicted, we will go in circles until we come to our senses and realize that a single payer system with a progressive tax structure is the most reasonable option.
6
You must be younger than me. (66)
In 1950 insurance didn't pay for doctor office visits and prescriptions. They were paid for out of pocket and the price was much lower as a percentage of income than today. In fact many times the doctor would give you samples enough so you didn't have to go to the pharmacy.
Despite the low cost doctors could have a 1 person office, kept reasonable hours and yet made hospital rounds and house calls.
Compare all that to today where people expect insurance to pay the entire bill no matter the size or what treatment was provided.
In 1950 insurance didn't pay for doctor office visits and prescriptions. They were paid for out of pocket and the price was much lower as a percentage of income than today. In fact many times the doctor would give you samples enough so you didn't have to go to the pharmacy.
Despite the low cost doctors could have a 1 person office, kept reasonable hours and yet made hospital rounds and house calls.
Compare all that to today where people expect insurance to pay the entire bill no matter the size or what treatment was provided.
1
What?!? Even the Obama administration indicated it is imploding.
"In October of last year the Obama administration announced that premiums would rise by double digits." Every where you turn insurers are either bowing out or asking for double digit premium increases, as Montana"s 2 insurers and 1 Obama coop just did (23%!) Ask any healthy 30 year old whether they are willing to pay high premiums or accept the (lower) penalty. My bet is only those who are subsidized have no problem with Obama care. For the rest of us it's a boondoggle.
"In October of last year the Obama administration announced that premiums would rise by double digits." Every where you turn insurers are either bowing out or asking for double digit premium increases, as Montana"s 2 insurers and 1 Obama coop just did (23%!) Ask any healthy 30 year old whether they are willing to pay high premiums or accept the (lower) penalty. My bet is only those who are subsidized have no problem with Obama care. For the rest of us it's a boondoggle.
13
Premiums for those of us self employed people buying health insurance for ourselves have gone up less per year since the ACA. Here in Ohio and in Florida I have personal experience with this.
7
Premiums were always rising. Under the ACA, they are rising more slowly. And if you've read the article you're commenting on, you'll see that some premium rises were due to GOP repealing parts of Obamacare that would have prevented premium rises. And GOP shenanigans continue to destabilize the market. So...
6
I am on Medicare. I have no problem with ACA-insured Americans being subsidized with my tax dollars. They are my brothers and sisters.
I am pleased to be an atheist who supports Jesus (Matthew 25:40 - take care of the least among us), rather than a fake Christian.
I am pleased to be an atheist who supports Jesus (Matthew 25:40 - take care of the least among us), rather than a fake Christian.
4
I am also the sole breadwinner of my family. I now pay 1800 per month for a family plan and my dedictible is 8000 dollars. This plan is a disaster for people trying to run a small business. I am almost slightly better off if I was on welfare and got Medicaid.
10
Tell us your family size, medal level, annual income and location. That will help determine how acute your situation is.
3
Even if the Affordable Care Act remained in effect and got some useful improvements, states like Texas and Florida would continue to obstruct it by, among other things, refusing to expand Medicaid. To some extent, the future is Sen. Cruz, at least until Texas voters tire of him and his ilk. For various reasons, that seems no more likely than an end to the hard-right Republican ascendency in Florida.
8
Congress needs to wise up to the reality that the ACA is popular with the VAST majority of the US people. They are the only ones who don't llke it, and they aren't even users! Although Trump, Ryan and McConnell beat their drums incessantly, Congress is not required to respond. Stand up for what's right (for once). Preserve the ACA.
16
To be blunt: whether or not it's popular is irrelevant. There was a time when Separate but Equal was popular, when Jim Crow was popular, etc. Appealing to the masses is not only a logical fallacy, it's just a bad way to go about justifying a policy. As this past election shows, not only does a full third of the US not consider voting to be valuable, a good portion of it doesn't bother to educate itself enough to make an informed decision. These are the masses you'd appeal to for support of the ACA?
8
Strongly disagree. Whether it is popular is highly relevant. People know what they need. Dear senators and House reps: Fix it! That's what we need.
2
At this point I don't care anymore, as long as the vast majority of the pain is in Trump stars. I don't care about those people.
3
Perhaps we should call the NY Times Editorial's bluff and just let Obamacare collapse on its own. The millions of able-bodied individuals who currently receive free Medical Care through Medicaid will just go back to paying for Medical care as they did before Obamacare from the wages they earn from off the books jobs. Medicaid will go back to being a program for the truly poor and disabled.
And as for all the Seniors getting free rides in nursing homes through Medicaid let's just claw back all the assets they dispersed among their relatives in order to qualify for taxpayer subsidized care.
And as for all the Seniors getting free rides in nursing homes through Medicaid let's just claw back all the assets they dispersed among their relatives in order to qualify for taxpayer subsidized care.
6
There are a lot of seniors needing help from Medicaid who did not disperse assets. This sounds like a new meme....
4
You do realize that there's a five-year look-back for Medicaid qualification for nursing home residents, right? You do realize, also, that at $250-300 per day own a nursing home, your assets will be gone pretty quickly, right?
And you do realize that the bulk of people receiving Medicaid are the working poor, right?
Don't let facts get in the way.
And you do realize that the bulk of people receiving Medicaid are the working poor, right?
Don't let facts get in the way.
5
Our Democrats in Congress need to let go of the name “Obamacare” or even “ACA.” Obama—and we Democrats—know that whatever it’s called, it’s still his biggest legacy and the positive accomplishment for which history will most strongly credit him. But they should recognize that with the GOP Congressional primary voter base, the Obama name is toxic, even as those voters approve of each component of the ACA.
So the GOP should agree to repair the ACA: improve patient premium subsidies, enforce violation of the purchase mandate, restore risk-corridor indemnities so that insurers can afford to stay in ill-served markets (states—most of which are GOP-majority and didn’t accept Medicaid subsidies), cap deductibles, tighten sanctions on frivolous lawsuits but not let avoidable physician error slide—while backing off on tax cuts for the ultra-wealthy; and give the repaired ACA a new name, maybe even one which gives the GOP credit. Their naive but extremist base will think “Obamacare" has been repealed & replaced; we Democrats know it’ll have been renamed but strengthened and improved; and Obama has a healthy & normal enough ego to not be insulted but instead secure in the knowledge his legacy will remain.
Either that, or let it fail to the point where we have no choice but to replace it with single-payer for all who want it (and a parallel private system for those willing to pay for “Cadillac care”).
So the GOP should agree to repair the ACA: improve patient premium subsidies, enforce violation of the purchase mandate, restore risk-corridor indemnities so that insurers can afford to stay in ill-served markets (states—most of which are GOP-majority and didn’t accept Medicaid subsidies), cap deductibles, tighten sanctions on frivolous lawsuits but not let avoidable physician error slide—while backing off on tax cuts for the ultra-wealthy; and give the repaired ACA a new name, maybe even one which gives the GOP credit. Their naive but extremist base will think “Obamacare" has been repealed & replaced; we Democrats know it’ll have been renamed but strengthened and improved; and Obama has a healthy & normal enough ego to not be insulted but instead secure in the knowledge his legacy will remain.
Either that, or let it fail to the point where we have no choice but to replace it with single-payer for all who want it (and a parallel private system for those willing to pay for “Cadillac care”).
4
The attack that the GOP and their supporters have mounted on the ACA (Obamacare) and blame that it is terrible, unworkable, and a failure so-it-needs-to-be-destroyed to make it better.
What they may not realize is how Obama engineered out of what had been built before, almost like how aircraft and space flight have been built, and improved on what has worked before.
You don't have to scrap completely something that works, that may have a few inefficiencies or is slightly out of date, and start from scratch...!
Repealing and replacing the ACA is just the tip of the iceberg for the GOP's plan to completely overhaul government, and the business of government, and hand it over to the MOB of the 1%.
They don't want/need government oversight into: banking and MURKY finances; clean water, clean air and climate change; separation of church and state and education; civil rights enforcement throughout most departments of state and national governments, and in the private sector; costly "war on drugs" programs that targets minorities and the poor disproportionately; reforming our criminal justice system and incarceration that also targets and entrap that same population.
Just "let them recolonize" the new world again and hand it over to the MOB with all the money. You see anything wrong with that...?
What they may not realize is how Obama engineered out of what had been built before, almost like how aircraft and space flight have been built, and improved on what has worked before.
You don't have to scrap completely something that works, that may have a few inefficiencies or is slightly out of date, and start from scratch...!
Repealing and replacing the ACA is just the tip of the iceberg for the GOP's plan to completely overhaul government, and the business of government, and hand it over to the MOB of the 1%.
They don't want/need government oversight into: banking and MURKY finances; clean water, clean air and climate change; separation of church and state and education; civil rights enforcement throughout most departments of state and national governments, and in the private sector; costly "war on drugs" programs that targets minorities and the poor disproportionately; reforming our criminal justice system and incarceration that also targets and entrap that same population.
Just "let them recolonize" the new world again and hand it over to the MOB with all the money. You see anything wrong with that...?
3
"The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to be governed at all."
-- GK Chesterton
-- GK Chesterton
1
May I suggest a civics lesson? Obama didn't engineer the ACA. Polosi submitted what the insurance companies wrote for the ACA and it had minor edits in congress. This was a handout to the insurance companies, as the NYtimes alludes to in this editorial. Their profits continue to go up.
I'm one of the middle-class families mentioned here. I'm the sole breadwinner -- a freelancer -- of a family of three with one on the way. In 2015, I barely made any moment and our marketplace United plan was a savior. The subsidies and discounted services were incredible. In 2016 the same benefits applied to our new Florida Blue plan. I made more money in 2016 - $42k instead of $27k, so our 2017 premiums are higher and there aren't many discounted services. Florida Blue's plans are insanely expensive, so in 2017 we switched to Molina. The big drawback was limited network...there was only one OBGYN in the whole city when we signed up in November. But, now, there are more than 25.
The ACA has it's weaknesses, but I'm so thankful we have it. The limited network is annoying, but Molina is following through on their promise to expand their network. In my experience as a Floridian and a freelancer, the ACA provides better, more affordable Care than the pre-ACA days.
My one beef with reporters is that they generalize marketplace plans and rarely talk about medal levels, income and deductibles.
So, here's our ACA data: Molina Gold, $584 premium, $15 PCP visits, $25 specialist visit, $60 urgent care visit, $300 ER visit. Deductibles are $1,025 per person. Most procedures are 20% after deductible.
The ACA has it's weaknesses, but I'm so thankful we have it. The limited network is annoying, but Molina is following through on their promise to expand their network. In my experience as a Floridian and a freelancer, the ACA provides better, more affordable Care than the pre-ACA days.
My one beef with reporters is that they generalize marketplace plans and rarely talk about medal levels, income and deductibles.
So, here's our ACA data: Molina Gold, $584 premium, $15 PCP visits, $25 specialist visit, $60 urgent care visit, $300 ER visit. Deductibles are $1,025 per person. Most procedures are 20% after deductible.
19
I’m the woman in the picture holding the sign—thank you for including me in your piece! I was one of many Indivisible members at the Thompson Center for that healthcare rally. As a grassroots movement working for progressive ideas, we have been fighting every assault on the ACA, and many of us have become more and more vocal in supporting Medicare for All. I appreciate that this article makes it clear that the ACA is, as you say, “working reasonably well” but does not shy away from noting some of the pieces that aren’t working—namely the unaffordability, for many people, of insurance plans due to high deductibles and premiums. Pointing out how much worse Mitch McConnell’s bill would make things, and the fact that the issues with the ACA are fixable are also key points as we continue to discuss and design healthcare in the United States.
32
@Mac -- Thank you for your work. We all knew -- Obama included -- that the ACA is not perfect. But it is a good start. Let's work to improve it rather than tearing it down completely. People HAVE been helped by it -- with time and dedication it can help even more. Taking the profit motive out of health care would be a good next step.
3
@Mac - Out of curiosity, have you thought about the fact that health insurance is predicated on not paying out for health care, because that's how insurance pools survive? And as a result, there is irony in attempting to link Health Insurance to Health Care? And further, that because Health Insurance and Health Care are not equatable, bestowing insurance on the uninsured doesn't establish a causal increase in the care they receive, and might only establish a limited correlation?
I'm not sure I get that. Health insurance isn't predicated on not paying out for health care (although I'm sure companies would think it was nice). Practically speaking any insurance is predicated on taking in more revenue that is being spent on health care.
And while bestowing insurance on the uninsured isn't perfectly correlated with better health care -- nothing is perfectly correlated with anything else -- there is surely a positive relationship between being insured and getting better health care than if you were uninsured.
And while bestowing insurance on the uninsured isn't perfectly correlated with better health care -- nothing is perfectly correlated with anything else -- there is surely a positive relationship between being insured and getting better health care than if you were uninsured.
4
It’s good to hear that insurers are doing better.
2
I'm with the 71%. Message to the Republicans: Fix the ACA, then start working on a civilized medical plan like most of the rest of the world has. Please.
18
The title might be correct today, but Obama will die a death by 1000 cuts, if some Republican senators and Congresspeople do not see trump (small t) for what he and the majority of Republican leaders are.
Passage of the Republican bill to replace Obamacare will start small and will in fact pass both the Senate and Congress. Then, we shall see the real cruelty of the Republicans and trump, when they start to pass legislation stripping the flesh off Obamacare.
It's been only 6 months (seems like an eternity), and look at what the trump and the Republicans have already done!
Passage of the Republican bill to replace Obamacare will start small and will in fact pass both the Senate and Congress. Then, we shall see the real cruelty of the Republicans and trump, when they start to pass legislation stripping the flesh off Obamacare.
It's been only 6 months (seems like an eternity), and look at what the trump and the Republicans have already done!
7
though I don't agree with your assessment of the ACA, I strongly agree with your point that just having a card means next to nothing in terms of finding available care, especially in rural areas.
just as the Republicans are trying now to pawn off a tax cut as a healthcare bill, the ACA is an insurance plan, not a healthcare plan.
the whole system is bad, from multi millionaire eye surgeons and anatheseologists in it for the fortune in fees, to the hospitals stratospheric billings to cover non paying indigent patients to the lack of care in rural areas and the racket of doctor referrals and private labs and test centers.
we have a vastly better program called Kaiser Permanente, but it is not available everywhere and it is not for docs who are looking to move up to a much bigger yacht. it isn't cheap but it also isn't bankrupting. some call it socialized medicine without the government component. don't know if it's scalable but it coukd be worth a try!
just as the Republicans are trying now to pawn off a tax cut as a healthcare bill, the ACA is an insurance plan, not a healthcare plan.
the whole system is bad, from multi millionaire eye surgeons and anatheseologists in it for the fortune in fees, to the hospitals stratospheric billings to cover non paying indigent patients to the lack of care in rural areas and the racket of doctor referrals and private labs and test centers.
we have a vastly better program called Kaiser Permanente, but it is not available everywhere and it is not for docs who are looking to move up to a much bigger yacht. it isn't cheap but it also isn't bankrupting. some call it socialized medicine without the government component. don't know if it's scalable but it coukd be worth a try!
16
As a Kaiser patient and big Kaiser fan (KP has saved my life twice in the last 2 months - literally) I have to point out that KP can't function on its own. I'm a KP member via Medicare, one of the two or three best government programs in US history along with Social Security and the GI Bill.
If providing the best possible healthcare for the American people were of any actual importance to Congress instead of a footnote to their genuine concerns for their real constituents, i.e., drug companies, insurers, healthcare businesses, etc., we would already have a single-payer system like Medicare For All, or even something like VA Care for All, like the UK's National Health Service (you know, like Doc Martin).
But it isn't important to any but a few in Congress. Instead we see the sorry spectacle of the congressional Republicans, who have relentlessly trashed Obamacare -- a watered-down Republican construct -- forced by their own rhetoric to try to replace it. They can't, because as stupid as most of their voters are and as happy as they were with their representatives trashing that black guy's every deed, that's how little those voters want his ACA's benefits taken away from them.
If providing the best possible healthcare for the American people were of any actual importance to Congress instead of a footnote to their genuine concerns for their real constituents, i.e., drug companies, insurers, healthcare businesses, etc., we would already have a single-payer system like Medicare For All, or even something like VA Care for All, like the UK's National Health Service (you know, like Doc Martin).
But it isn't important to any but a few in Congress. Instead we see the sorry spectacle of the congressional Republicans, who have relentlessly trashed Obamacare -- a watered-down Republican construct -- forced by their own rhetoric to try to replace it. They can't, because as stupid as most of their voters are and as happy as they were with their representatives trashing that black guy's every deed, that's how little those voters want his ACA's benefits taken away from them.
1
I know of someone who was recently diagnosed with stage 4 lung cancer. He lost his job some time ago, but has managed to find work (albeit for much less pay). He's in his early 60s. His first thought when hearing his diagnosis was, "Thank God for Obamacare." Otherwise, he could not afford treatment.
This man is why the ACA was enacted. And there but for the grace of God go the rest of us.
I can't imagine what it must be like to be as petty and mean-spirited as Mitch McConnell and his friends, who are willing to hurt millions simply because they can't stand the man who crafted the bill. Explain their opposition as loftily as you want -- but that is the real reason why they want the ACA gone.
This man is why the ACA was enacted. And there but for the grace of God go the rest of us.
I can't imagine what it must be like to be as petty and mean-spirited as Mitch McConnell and his friends, who are willing to hurt millions simply because they can't stand the man who crafted the bill. Explain their opposition as loftily as you want -- but that is the real reason why they want the ACA gone.
31
My wife and I, in our early 60s (no children), have watched our medical insurance premiums rocket from about $550.00 per month about four years ago to over $1,600.00 per month. Our deductibles have gone from $1,500.00 per year, per person, with the same amount max co-pay, to a deductible of $3,000.00 per year, per person, with a $4,000.00 max co-pay. Fortunately, as we are both lawyers, and we can afford it (with our accumulated assets we can't afford to go without health insurance). We are only 3 and 4 years from Medicare, respectively, which will slash our medical costs by at least half.
Our medical premiums come right off the top of our gross incomes as a business expense (just like rent or malpractice insurance) on our pass-through-income law practices, which from a tax standpoint is better for us than a personal deduction on our 1040. Has anybody measured the amount of income tax revenue lost by the federal and state governments due to these horrendous medical-insurance premiums? It must be a tremendous amount. It is as if a river of money has been diverted from income tax to medical insurance companies. We spend twice as much as European countries do. I would rather that half what I am paying to medical insurance companies go to help people in other areas of their lives, such as education and childcare.
Our medical premiums come right off the top of our gross incomes as a business expense (just like rent or malpractice insurance) on our pass-through-income law practices, which from a tax standpoint is better for us than a personal deduction on our 1040. Has anybody measured the amount of income tax revenue lost by the federal and state governments due to these horrendous medical-insurance premiums? It must be a tremendous amount. It is as if a river of money has been diverted from income tax to medical insurance companies. We spend twice as much as European countries do. I would rather that half what I am paying to medical insurance companies go to help people in other areas of their lives, such as education and childcare.
15
Despite putting in .00 after each dollar amount, you forget to mention one important detail: are you talking about Obamacare, or are you talking about insurance you bought elsewhere?
Because it's true that employer payments for medical insurance aren't taxable. But is tax revenue more important than health insurance? Not sure what your question is really about.
Because it's true that employer payments for medical insurance aren't taxable. But is tax revenue more important than health insurance? Not sure what your question is really about.
5
@Duane,
"Has anybody measured the amount of income tax revenue lost by the federal and state governments due to these horrendous medical-insurance premiums?"
Dude, are you joking?
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/07/health/health-insurance-tax-deduction...
Duane, the reason we pay twice as much as other countries is that a substantial proportion of people's compensation has been sequestered for the healthcare-industrial-complex.
If a typical worker got $20K a year of her compensation tax free, but was only allowed to spend it on automobiles, everyone would be driving very expensive cars.
And the tax on that compensation, that should have gone to support other programs, like SS and Medicaid and education, has been lost!
So yes, it is a problem, but a bigger problem is that even educated people like yourself aren't aware of how this (absurd) system works.
"Has anybody measured the amount of income tax revenue lost by the federal and state governments due to these horrendous medical-insurance premiums?"
Dude, are you joking?
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/07/health/health-insurance-tax-deduction...
Duane, the reason we pay twice as much as other countries is that a substantial proportion of people's compensation has been sequestered for the healthcare-industrial-complex.
If a typical worker got $20K a year of her compensation tax free, but was only allowed to spend it on automobiles, everyone would be driving very expensive cars.
And the tax on that compensation, that should have gone to support other programs, like SS and Medicaid and education, has been lost!
So yes, it is a problem, but a bigger problem is that even educated people like yourself aren't aware of how this (absurd) system works.
9
Not Obamacare--purely non-subsidized. My concern, at a national level, is that my wife and I, in paying so much more for health insurance as self-employed persons and writing that off 100%, are paying less in income tax to the government. I guess no one cares about the reduction in tax revenue to the government in favor of insurance companies whose shares have gone up over 300% in the last few years.
2
The GOP plan to block grant funds to the states is another devious plot because of the balanced budget requirement of states. As states struggle and redirect funds intended for Health Care the GOP will wash their hands like Pontius Pilate.
9
The dog has caught the car
11
Where the rubber meets the road (here in Flyover Country) it is clear that Obamacare has been a dismal failure. 1500 characters are insufficient to fully document all of its failings. The Times Editorial Board ought to interview people who are actually paying for health insurance in order to educate the Editorial Board, rather than the bluster/propaganda spewed by those who truly do not know.
10
I know plenty of people in fly-over country, and all but one is very happy with Obamacare. Can you detail specifically the bad experiences of a few of the people who you are referring to?
17
Annual rate increases of 18% to 25% for starters. As a man more than 60 years of age, I am now required (in order to have a compliant plan) to have coverage for maternity, well-baby, drug rehabilitation, etc. Those who created Obamacare did it on the basis that "they know more than those of us who are seeking the coverage."
Please ask your colleagues who have had good experiences if they received subsidies to cover some of the cost of their insurance? What proponents of Obamacare are loathe to tell others is that the amount of the subsidy can be treated as taxable income.
I know of several people who expected to receive federal tax refunds. The magnitude of the refund was either reduced or eliminated altogether.
The over-arching issue (from the small business perspective) is that we get hit on both increased premiums and on increased federal 941 taxes (covers the expanded Medicaid).
While the expanded Medicaid helps keep rural hospitals open and helps those directly impacted by the opiate crises, it now also covers many able-bodied young people who have given up on seeking employment.
In large measure, my view of Obamacare's manifest failures is invisible from those in Congress. The impact is substantial, since the higher insurance premiums and the higher 941 taxes effectively limit our growth (i.e., hiring more employees) and our ability to increase wages/benefits.
The typical elected official has not met a payroll and does not understand these impacts.
Please ask your colleagues who have had good experiences if they received subsidies to cover some of the cost of their insurance? What proponents of Obamacare are loathe to tell others is that the amount of the subsidy can be treated as taxable income.
I know of several people who expected to receive federal tax refunds. The magnitude of the refund was either reduced or eliminated altogether.
The over-arching issue (from the small business perspective) is that we get hit on both increased premiums and on increased federal 941 taxes (covers the expanded Medicaid).
While the expanded Medicaid helps keep rural hospitals open and helps those directly impacted by the opiate crises, it now also covers many able-bodied young people who have given up on seeking employment.
In large measure, my view of Obamacare's manifest failures is invisible from those in Congress. The impact is substantial, since the higher insurance premiums and the higher 941 taxes effectively limit our growth (i.e., hiring more employees) and our ability to increase wages/benefits.
The typical elected official has not met a payroll and does not understand these impacts.
Many people blame problems of a for-profit healthcare system on Obamacare, and many times it's clear they would be worse off without it, and they would not be helped by a repeal or the current Republican plan.
2
I'm happy to pay taxes to give people a shot at good insurance and health care; I am not happy to pay taxes to provide the wealthy with another tax cut. This GOP bill is not a health insurance bill, it is a tax reform bill.
22
"This GOP bill is not a health insurance bill, it is a tax reform bill."
It is not a tax reform bill either; it is a tax cut that overwhelmingly benefits the wealthiest Americans at the expense of the rest of us.
It is not a tax reform bill either; it is a tax cut that overwhelmingly benefits the wealthiest Americans at the expense of the rest of us.
7
"I'm happy to pay taxes to give people a shot at good insurance and health care..."
How much of a percentage of your paycheck would you be willing to part with to give others a shot at good insurance and health care?
"This GOP bill is not a health insurance bill, it is a tax reform bill."
The ACA isn't insurance, either. It's a taxpayer-funded boondoggle that's falling apart.
How much of a percentage of your paycheck would you be willing to part with to give others a shot at good insurance and health care?
"This GOP bill is not a health insurance bill, it is a tax reform bill."
The ACA isn't insurance, either. It's a taxpayer-funded boondoggle that's falling apart.
2
Mac Grambauer's sign says it all - Medicare for All will fix what ails this country's access to health care, and will continue to lead us to our more perfect union. Republicans, start saving our country by listening to your constituents and do the right thing.
11
You're not dependent on Medicare at this point are you, Laura?
1
I am, and it's great. It would be a wonderful universal plan.
@Dan0, I don't know about Laura, but I am dependent on Medicare.
Two years ago I needed a revision (ball and socket) to my artificial hip. My hospital bill was for TV and phone. Well worth my Medicare supplement plan which covered my Medicare Part A deductible, and my part B co-pay, at $1,100 p.a. The plan is the top-of-the line offer from my private insurer.
So, what's your implied beef with Medicare?
Two years ago I needed a revision (ball and socket) to my artificial hip. My hospital bill was for TV and phone. Well worth my Medicare supplement plan which covered my Medicare Part A deductible, and my part B co-pay, at $1,100 p.a. The plan is the top-of-the line offer from my private insurer.
So, what's your implied beef with Medicare?
The average American family is paying over $18,000 for total health care costs per the CNBC article below. This cost is clearly unsustainable for the average family and drives a number of families into bankruptcy.
Our healthcare system is the most expensive one in the world and the ACA does little to change that fact. No doctor, hospital or drug company is going to charge me less because of the ACA. Rather, the main economic players are free to charge whatever they can get away with. In short, while the ACA may not be entirely collapsing, imploding or exploding; the American health care system is!
CNBC
That means that, last year, the average family paid $9,996 for coverage alone, and, if they met their deductible, a total of just under $18,000. Meanwhile, an average individual spent $3,852 on coverage and, if she spent another $4,358 to meet her deductible, a total of $8,210.
Our healthcare system is the most expensive one in the world and the ACA does little to change that fact. No doctor, hospital or drug company is going to charge me less because of the ACA. Rather, the main economic players are free to charge whatever they can get away with. In short, while the ACA may not be entirely collapsing, imploding or exploding; the American health care system is!
CNBC
That means that, last year, the average family paid $9,996 for coverage alone, and, if they met their deductible, a total of just under $18,000. Meanwhile, an average individual spent $3,852 on coverage and, if she spent another $4,358 to meet her deductible, a total of $8,210.
5
Our healthcare system is the most expensive one in the world and the ACA does little to change that fact.
That was not it's IMMEDIATE goal; however it is a long term goal. ACA wants to get EVERYONE into the system so everyone gets their annual visit to their PCP for FREE (mandated in the coverage) so OVER TIME costs come down as we find disease earlier and earlier. The ACA was designed to get those who had no access access. What we need JK is to fix what is there.
Please know of what you speak before you do.
That was not it's IMMEDIATE goal; however it is a long term goal. ACA wants to get EVERYONE into the system so everyone gets their annual visit to their PCP for FREE (mandated in the coverage) so OVER TIME costs come down as we find disease earlier and earlier. The ACA was designed to get those who had no access access. What we need JK is to fix what is there.
Please know of what you speak before you do.
4
The ACA includes a number of key provisions and initiatives that have bent the cost growth curve so that annual growth is lower than before the ACA. Still your point that we pay too much is valid and much more needs to be done.
6
The repubs will never do anything for average people. We all know the flaws of the ACA are fixable, but sabotaging it is their only goal.
They denounced and fought against Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, workers comp., unemployment insurance, child labor laws, overtime pay, minimum wage, etc. And they oppose all of these to this day.
They will never support the ACA or Universal Health care. They never cooperate with democrats in any meaningful way in this era. Their greed, cruelty and inhumanity knows no limits. Removing regulations and enriching the 1% is all that matters, along with spewing lies and propaganda to their non-thinking supporters.
Both McConnell and Ryan are toads, trump a lying ignoramus, and they will never do the right thing in regard to the greater good.
The only solution is to vote them out. How I don't know, as ignorance is so prevalent in this country.
But the rest of us have to try to remove them and stuff them in a mansion somewhere so they can pour tea for the billionaires they serve. We can include universal health care as part of the package, though.
They denounced and fought against Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, workers comp., unemployment insurance, child labor laws, overtime pay, minimum wage, etc. And they oppose all of these to this day.
They will never support the ACA or Universal Health care. They never cooperate with democrats in any meaningful way in this era. Their greed, cruelty and inhumanity knows no limits. Removing regulations and enriching the 1% is all that matters, along with spewing lies and propaganda to their non-thinking supporters.
Both McConnell and Ryan are toads, trump a lying ignoramus, and they will never do the right thing in regard to the greater good.
The only solution is to vote them out. How I don't know, as ignorance is so prevalent in this country.
But the rest of us have to try to remove them and stuff them in a mansion somewhere so they can pour tea for the billionaires they serve. We can include universal health care as part of the package, though.
13
There seem to be at least three ways to "fix" the ACA: (1) raise taxes in order to provide better subsidies for the middle class so that their deductibles are more manageable; (2) institute a government option to provide health care where insurance companies have pulled out of the marketplace,, and (3) single payer where the government becomes the principal insurer. New York's Senate is one vote shy of the Single Payer in which everyone would be covered and pay according to their income. Could poorer states than New York or California afford such a plan? Perhaps they could if we had a mass movement of the type that Senator Sanders has tried to mobilize and which implicitly would push for higher taxes on both the top ten percent and upper brackets of the middle class.
2
The only message that will get through to the Republican Party is the one delivered at the ballot box. If the 2018 mid-term elections result in the party losing majorities in either the House or the Senate, then and only then will Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan take heed.
Of course, it might be too much to ask that those two men be voted out of office when they are up for re-election.
Of course, it might be too much to ask that those two men be voted out of office when they are up for re-election.
8
"The only message that will get through to the Republican Party is the one delivered at the ballot box."
That's why, after passage of the ACA, Democrats have been booted out of power in both houses of Congress and now the White House.
That's why, after passage of the ACA, Democrats have been booted out of power in both houses of Congress and now the White House.
1
And if the GOP takes ownership of a new health care bill, they too will face the voters' wrath. Health care is personal--it's something people vote on.
It's about time...that some major voice pointed out this obvious point! The relentless meme propagated by the Repubs has only been faintly challenged in the media - while meanwhile the countless rallies, protests, demonstrations, over these past many months - by apparently satisfied ACA users - speak volumes.
10
No end to the lies. That is their genius. Make it up, spread the word, repeat until the media and public become exhausted. then cite the lie as proof for the next outrage.
10
The Dems have done a lousy job of explaining what this article has done in a few words. Where are the TV ads telling the real story? Is it any wonder that the folks in Kentucky, for instance, hate the Obamacare plan but love the state's plan; which is the ACA with a different name??
7
Its about business not government. Government is the organ through which the planets resources (which existed before the appearance of self appointed owners of them.) are circulated and shared to support the evolution of the Planet.
The notion of the private ownership of property by an unavoidably mortal human being which was introduced and upheld by sheer power and is being maintained by power and ignorance, is what business is about.
Until we are able to completely disconnect Government of for and by the People from the "clutches" of greed and amoral power which motivates "business" we will have to battle this kind of stupidity.
I understand that these ideas are considered by intellectuals to be "idealistic" but for those who think as well as process data, they are simply the Principles of physics. The efforts to "fix" the economic insanity that has generated death by both poverty and luxury have been dealing with the effects rather than the causes. Consequently, the latest "fix" carries the germ of the original cause (the lust of separative personal power and greed) and will inevitably result in a break down and a break out out of chaos, things like market collapse, wars, starvation.
The only real solution to the present temporary and piecemeal non-functional health plans is to eliminate any sense of private ownership of health care from the field. That is, getting rid of the insurance mafia and using the People's resources to keep the People healthy.
The notion of the private ownership of property by an unavoidably mortal human being which was introduced and upheld by sheer power and is being maintained by power and ignorance, is what business is about.
Until we are able to completely disconnect Government of for and by the People from the "clutches" of greed and amoral power which motivates "business" we will have to battle this kind of stupidity.
I understand that these ideas are considered by intellectuals to be "idealistic" but for those who think as well as process data, they are simply the Principles of physics. The efforts to "fix" the economic insanity that has generated death by both poverty and luxury have been dealing with the effects rather than the causes. Consequently, the latest "fix" carries the germ of the original cause (the lust of separative personal power and greed) and will inevitably result in a break down and a break out out of chaos, things like market collapse, wars, starvation.
The only real solution to the present temporary and piecemeal non-functional health plans is to eliminate any sense of private ownership of health care from the field. That is, getting rid of the insurance mafia and using the People's resources to keep the People healthy.
3
The Times should have run this editorial long ago. The Repubs have been bad-mouthing ACA for a long time and all I hear to counter this is a pallid "it does need some tweaking". It's hardly going out on a limb to support it! Upwards of 60% of the U.S. like ACA now. It represents some outstanding work and daring efforts. Nothing like it has ever been done in America; it's as much a product of American pluck and ingenuity as any spacecraft. It deserves across-the-board cheerleading to counter spite-filled anti-Obama fear-mongering from the Republicans.
10
It matters not one iota whether the ACA is working or imploding. The Republican party line is that the ACA is a disaster, facts to the contrary be damned. The United States is the only industrialized country in the world were the population can actually be convinced that a right to universal health care is not in their best interest. Not only that, they believe the Republicans when they say that universal health care in other countries doesn't work. Well, I hate to break it to the die hard Republican base, but Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, France, Germany and many others vehemently disagree with you. Those of us who have actually lived in another country know how inferior the American health care system is compared to other industrialized nations. Maybe the view we need to take is that if we are dumb enough to repeatedly vote against our own self interests, based on religious, hegemonic or nationalist dogma, than we deserve what we get.
86
Two thoughts.
Guess what? It's not just the industrialized world. Having spent time in various third world and developing countries including El Salvador, Cuba, Panama, etc. I can testify that excellent quality care is available at a tiny fraction of the cost in the US. I might not want my rare and complex surgery done in those places, but basic healthcare and even serious but common surgeries like a hip replacement, no problem.
Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans seem to want to acknowledge that we sit on a huge pool of resources that a present adds little to no value to the healthcare system, namely the outlandish administrative, profit, infrastructure costs associated with the private health insurance industry. Recent data (https://www.cms.gov/research-statistics-data-and-systems/statistics-tren... shows private health insurance spending in 2015 at just over a trillion dollars. The non-clinical portion of that trillion amounts to a minimum of 30 cents of every private healthcare dollar, and probably more. That would suggest that a minimum of $300 billion dollars is available for lowering costs and/or providing universal coverage if Congress can only take actions that would help "repeal and replace" the current private insurance system.
Guess what? It's not just the industrialized world. Having spent time in various third world and developing countries including El Salvador, Cuba, Panama, etc. I can testify that excellent quality care is available at a tiny fraction of the cost in the US. I might not want my rare and complex surgery done in those places, but basic healthcare and even serious but common surgeries like a hip replacement, no problem.
Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans seem to want to acknowledge that we sit on a huge pool of resources that a present adds little to no value to the healthcare system, namely the outlandish administrative, profit, infrastructure costs associated with the private health insurance industry. Recent data (https://www.cms.gov/research-statistics-data-and-systems/statistics-tren... shows private health insurance spending in 2015 at just over a trillion dollars. The non-clinical portion of that trillion amounts to a minimum of 30 cents of every private healthcare dollar, and probably more. That would suggest that a minimum of $300 billion dollars is available for lowering costs and/or providing universal coverage if Congress can only take actions that would help "repeal and replace" the current private insurance system.
7
To this I will add a final though. In the industrial country list by Kagetora with a pubic health insurance plan, those plants were implemented by social-democratic or labour parties.
3
Excellent analysis. But remember that the Republican argument is again to lie and say that a single payer system would bankrupt the country. They repeatedly say that the government cannot possibly do anything right and any government run program will be a total failure. By that logic I suppose that the US military is incompetent? I think not.
We either pay LESS upfront (coverage/insurance/care) or we pay more on the backend with a bunch of folks playing Vegas with their health and our $$s.
If nothing else, at least have the debate on HealthCare being a right or a privilege?
Because this current "mine is but your's ain't" isn't getting us anywhere.
If nothing else, at least have the debate on HealthCare being a right or a privilege?
Because this current "mine is but your's ain't" isn't getting us anywhere.
5
How many NYT reporters or editors have tried to use Obamacare cards? Can you all pay those co-pays and deductibles ? Guess who pays for those huge increases in Medicaid and subsidies?---hard-working American taxpayers.
Having an Obamacare card does not necessarily mean you can actually get care or find a doctor. Many of us physicians have retired earlier because of the red-tape, forms and bureaucratic intrusions of the unaffordable care act that was rammed down America's throat by Democrats like Pelosi who fidn't even read the legislation!
Having an Obamacare card does not necessarily mean you can actually get care or find a doctor. Many of us physicians have retired earlier because of the red-tape, forms and bureaucratic intrusions of the unaffordable care act that was rammed down America's throat by Democrats like Pelosi who fidn't even read the legislation!
7
Sorry about your anecdotal experiences, but most of our fellow Docs support ACA and fear what the red Team has as an alternative. I have worked in all manners of private, military, hybrid, and Gov't health care positions...and I think single payer is the way to go (why not eliminate the 30% of $ that goes for ins. co. overhead?) I'm currently working in the largest (as well as socialist) health care company in America..the VA. Not perfect, but we have the Apples to Apples comparisons of outcomes to show...
3
"....Mr. McConnell and his party have become so blinded by their rage against Obamacare...". And the people be damned, and doomed, due to the rage against Everything Obama.
What will the outrage be from The People should the McConnell We Don't Care About You death care bill be passed and signed into law by the "president". Will it be immediate or will those most affected be outraged later when they either face the possibility of death or certain bankruptcy.
Yet those who Hate Everything Obama will be cheering and celebrating, including the "president". Bigly.
What will the outrage be from The People should the McConnell We Don't Care About You death care bill be passed and signed into law by the "president". Will it be immediate or will those most affected be outraged later when they either face the possibility of death or certain bankruptcy.
Yet those who Hate Everything Obama will be cheering and celebrating, including the "president". Bigly.
1
Self-delusion.
Everyone in govt is looking backwards...smuggly telling themselves in the mirror, "i'm progressive". WRONG. You're REgressive.
We're attempting to pull america out of the 21st Century and back to a happy place, constructed in the 1930s, the New Deal.....now 80 years old.
ObamaCare is one of those nostalgic programs. Nothing remotely "progressive" or "innovative" about it. It is an imitation of the now destroyed Social Security Act.
Social Security, now a fragile shell of its former strength, sapped of all its savings, was successful because it was funded through a TAX on "incomes", which were expanding 1930-1970, the 40 year uphill ride for the New Deal Era.
Then began the 40 year downhill slide. Incomes stagnated, with brief surges in between as a new economy was quietly being constructed, and then Incomes actually began to fall.
Our Politiicans solution? Tax falling incomes MORE in a desparate attempt to keep the faltering Keynsian economic principals running.
The self-delusion we are engaging in right now......we insist on believing that ObamaCare and whatever trainwreck the Repubs have now designed ... actually have something to do with "health Care". They do not.
Its all a tragically doomed attempt to prop up a Dead Economy thru a tax on income.
Everyone in govt is looking backwards...smuggly telling themselves in the mirror, "i'm progressive". WRONG. You're REgressive.
We're attempting to pull america out of the 21st Century and back to a happy place, constructed in the 1930s, the New Deal.....now 80 years old.
ObamaCare is one of those nostalgic programs. Nothing remotely "progressive" or "innovative" about it. It is an imitation of the now destroyed Social Security Act.
Social Security, now a fragile shell of its former strength, sapped of all its savings, was successful because it was funded through a TAX on "incomes", which were expanding 1930-1970, the 40 year uphill ride for the New Deal Era.
Then began the 40 year downhill slide. Incomes stagnated, with brief surges in between as a new economy was quietly being constructed, and then Incomes actually began to fall.
Our Politiicans solution? Tax falling incomes MORE in a desparate attempt to keep the faltering Keynsian economic principals running.
The self-delusion we are engaging in right now......we insist on believing that ObamaCare and whatever trainwreck the Repubs have now designed ... actually have something to do with "health Care". They do not.
Its all a tragically doomed attempt to prop up a Dead Economy thru a tax on income.
Obamacare did not generally tax falling incomes, it largely taxed rising incomes - the only rising incomes, that of the 1%. As for Social Security dying, it can be fixed once again by taxing rising incomes by eliminating the upper threshold at which income is taxed. Have SS paid for by taxing ALL income, not just that of the lower and middle class, and you have the simplest of solutions. All politicians aren't blind to this. One party is standing in the way of these simple reforms, and we all know who they "R".
It's always amusing to see a revisionist history. Could we also say that the GOP wants to take us back to the Gilded Age, when there was no social safety net and robber barons ran the country? The New Deal, the Great Society, and the ACA all move us toward a more civilized society, and that's progress.
By the way, it would be pretty hard to render Keynesian economic theory obsolete since it's basic to all economic theory (except the Laffer supply-side nonsense.) I don't know of any reputable economists who have repudiated Keynesian theory.
By the way, it would be pretty hard to render Keynesian economic theory obsolete since it's basic to all economic theory (except the Laffer supply-side nonsense.) I don't know of any reputable economists who have repudiated Keynesian theory.
This column does a good job of expressing the true state of the ACA. But, the problem is that none of this "providing good healthcare to Americans" makes a bit of difference to the Republicans. It must be realized that the constituents of the GOP are not the working class folk who are covered by the ACA. No, the GOP constituents are the oligarchs in the Republican donor class. So, McConnell is working to satisfy the GOP constituents as he sees them, not as the ACA sees them.
The "repeal and replace" nonsense is no more than a giant money grab, and to hell with the Americans who really need good healthcare. It is a disgusting example of what the Republican Party has become - selfish, greedy, uncaring about their fellow citizens, willing to lie and deceive to any degree so long as their goals of cutting taxes on the wealthy are met. And that also shows how utterly stupid the Republicans are. Who will be hurt the most by this repeal? Working class white Republicans, the same ones who jumped up and down and screamed their support at Trump rallies when he said he'd repeal the very program which provided them with the health insurance they need.
I can feel no sympathy at all for them. They were willingly duped by the charlatan Trump, and they will pay a heavy price for that. And they have earned every bit.
But I do feel sorry for the other ACA recipients, those who are grateful for the help it provides and know exactly who is ruining America for all - the regressive Republicans.
The "repeal and replace" nonsense is no more than a giant money grab, and to hell with the Americans who really need good healthcare. It is a disgusting example of what the Republican Party has become - selfish, greedy, uncaring about their fellow citizens, willing to lie and deceive to any degree so long as their goals of cutting taxes on the wealthy are met. And that also shows how utterly stupid the Republicans are. Who will be hurt the most by this repeal? Working class white Republicans, the same ones who jumped up and down and screamed their support at Trump rallies when he said he'd repeal the very program which provided them with the health insurance they need.
I can feel no sympathy at all for them. They were willingly duped by the charlatan Trump, and they will pay a heavy price for that. And they have earned every bit.
But I do feel sorry for the other ACA recipients, those who are grateful for the help it provides and know exactly who is ruining America for all - the regressive Republicans.
10
I my view the greatest tragedy is that we have a majority of Repulicans who act not in the public interest but instead out spite and fear. They just can't get over that a black guy- who they are still so very threatened by - finally came up with a plan that works. Yes, of course it need fixing! Not evisceration! These "good Christian's" are nothing more than a gang of hypocrites, liars and thieves.
11
All those affected positively by the Affordable Care Act need to keep coming forward. It is too bad there was not a positive showing previously when President Obama was in office! But now is the time. Do not stop telling your stories, calling your legislators, showing up for rallies, demanding town halls with your Congressional leaders, writing editorials.
If this old woman and nurse can carry a homemade "Save Our Healthcare" sign overnite on a bus from Wisconsin, to Washington DC and walk with it on January 21st, 2017, we can all do our part. We must! We must protect the vulnerable. We cannot let this slip by.
Thanks to all those who move forward to uphold healthcare for their family members, their neighbors, and for all the people in this country they have never met. That is what makes America Great!
If this old woman and nurse can carry a homemade "Save Our Healthcare" sign overnite on a bus from Wisconsin, to Washington DC and walk with it on January 21st, 2017, we can all do our part. We must! We must protect the vulnerable. We cannot let this slip by.
Thanks to all those who move forward to uphold healthcare for their family members, their neighbors, and for all the people in this country they have never met. That is what makes America Great!
5
Safeguarding the health of their constituents? Seriously? Their constituents are their big financial backers! The GOP is tacking on meaningless additions to their vicious bill and will try again to quickly ram it through.
Meanwhile, I wait patiently for the first Democrat to scream bloody murder and say if the GOP tries to do this and avoid scrutiny by the CBO, he will physically throw himself in the way of Mitch McConnell before he will let this carnage to the American people occur. Fat chance.
I never thought I'd say it, but these are the moments I miss Anthony Weiner.
www.newyorkgritty.net
Meanwhile, I wait patiently for the first Democrat to scream bloody murder and say if the GOP tries to do this and avoid scrutiny by the CBO, he will physically throw himself in the way of Mitch McConnell before he will let this carnage to the American people occur. Fat chance.
I never thought I'd say it, but these are the moments I miss Anthony Weiner.
www.newyorkgritty.net
2
The fix for what ails health care - Medicare for all! It's all about real people get real heath care, stupid! What's so hard to understand that?
4
How much of your own paycheck are you willing to part with tho make that happen?
1
That's where you libertarians miss the boat. We liberals are willing to pay more in taxes so that others might live. When money becomes more important to you that life itself, maybe it's time to rethink your own ignorant position.
"...The A.C.A. is not perfect, but its problems are fixable. In fact, 71 percent of Americans want Republicans to work with Democrats to improve the law; just 23 percent want lawmakers to repeal and replace it, according to a Kaiser poll. Democrats have said they would be willing to work with Republicans to strengthen the law..."
___
"Democrats have said they would be willing to work with Republicans to strengthen the law."
President Obama said he was willing to work with (R)s on a number of issues...
AS LONG AS (R)s ceded to (D)s demands. - This is Partisan Politics 101.
___
"Democrats have said they would be willing to work with Republicans to strengthen the law."
President Obama said he was willing to work with (R)s on a number of issues...
AS LONG AS (R)s ceded to (D)s demands. - This is Partisan Politics 101.
I have suggested that the Republican quorums in Congress be renamed "Death panels". I repeat my suggestion.
3
The Editorial Board is being disingenuous in saying that Obamacare is not collapsing. "The truth is that the law is actually working reasonably well, and even the part that has shown the most weakness — the health insurance marketplaces." That's like saying my car is doing fine ... except the engine that needs to work to turn the wheels. Obamacare is mainly two things - Medicaid expansion and the Exchanges. It's not surprising that Medicaid recipients are happy - since you are giving them something for nothing.
"Insurers suffered big losses in the early years, in part because many families who had not had comprehensive health insurance for years signed up and needed more care than the average family." That's simply propaganda. When most of the insurers who provided coverage have lost millions and have exited most counties (United, Humana, Aetna), that's a collapse. Even some of the smaller insurers which Obama touted as being more experienced in dealing with a poor population are now losing money and exiting - e.g. Molina.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/insurer-molina-suffers-obamacare-losse...
Insurers are losing money because Obamacare severely restricts what insurers can price - forcing them to overcharge the young and undercharge the elderly. As expected, you get fewer young than expected and insurers lose money pricing to the "community rating". This process is called a death spiral.
"Insurers suffered big losses in the early years, in part because many families who had not had comprehensive health insurance for years signed up and needed more care than the average family." That's simply propaganda. When most of the insurers who provided coverage have lost millions and have exited most counties (United, Humana, Aetna), that's a collapse. Even some of the smaller insurers which Obama touted as being more experienced in dealing with a poor population are now losing money and exiting - e.g. Molina.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/insurer-molina-suffers-obamacare-losse...
Insurers are losing money because Obamacare severely restricts what insurers can price - forcing them to overcharge the young and undercharge the elderly. As expected, you get fewer young than expected and insurers lose money pricing to the "community rating". This process is called a death spiral.
5
The editorial makes the point that the markets have stabilized and insurers are making money. Do you have evidence to the contrary?
Insurance companies have made clear that they're exiting because of uncertainty that the GOP will continue subsidies and the ACA itself. Insurers are reacting to uncertainty.
Insurance companies have made clear that they're exiting because of uncertainty that the GOP will continue subsidies and the ACA itself. Insurers are reacting to uncertainty.
But the rich must scream for their tax cuts, Panic! Panic! with their voices amplified a billion times with every political donation. Health, schmealth, it's all about wealth.
1
The Republicans' assessment of the ACA was wrong all along. But they convinced voters it was the Democrats' fault. Now they're more interested in keeping up the lie than admitting they were wrong all along. As if it's more honorable to be consistent with bad promises than insightful or useful or productive. That's the hallmark of a liar - they stick to lies in the face of the truth. Someone who has good intentions recovers from mistakes. That's not the case with Republicans. I can't say which is worse the frailty of the male egos involved in the Republican party or the stupidity of the voters who believed repealing the ACA would be good for the country or the impotence of the media to explain things in a way people can understand.
3
I do hope Trump is willing to share his guilt with McConnell, Ryan, Cornyn, King, Grassley, and Hatch.
1
Only men with a morale compass or a feeling of empathy or responsibility to others feel guilt.
4
If it's working so well let's leave it alone for a couple of years. LOL
1
Why would that be funny? Yes, they should leave the ACA alone, with the federal government paying the same subsidies as were paid under the last administration. If they need to stabilize some rural markets, they should do so. But they should not attempt to undermine the ACA or remove its protections.
And they should leave Medicaid alone.
And they should leave Medicaid alone.
The editorial does injustice to the reasons behind the lies perpetuated by the Republicans. There is no desire on their part to make sure all Americans have affordable access to healthcare. Rather this is a deceitful ploy which aims to do three things: (1). Erase the signature achievement of the black man. (2). Provide a tax cut for the affluent and uber-Rich and continue the greed of trickle-down economics'. And (3), eviscerate Medicaid to disassemble the welfare-state which they believe is used by the undesirable takers in society: the black, the AIDS patient, the poor, the disabled, the illegals, the old, and the mentally infirm. I wish the NYT would put it out there in plain English!
4
I believe the GOP is involved in what's known as a death cult. They're waiting for the world to end as predicted by some guy who said something somewhere.
2
The republican actions over the past 8 years would get the party driven out in disgrace in any sane country. Makes me think of a bumper sticker I recall seeing years ago: ' The republicans are destroying millions of jobs just to put one black man out of work!'
Now they are salivating at the thought of letting a quarter million people die and cutting a million health care jobs over ten years just to give a bunch of billionaires a few extra buckets of cash to squirrel away in some offshore bank account. This leads me to very unkind thoughts.
Now they are salivating at the thought of letting a quarter million people die and cutting a million health care jobs over ten years just to give a bunch of billionaires a few extra buckets of cash to squirrel away in some offshore bank account. This leads me to very unkind thoughts.
6
Clearly the Grumpy Old People's party is motivated by spite, greed and rage that a mixed race man, white woman and white man (Obama, Pelosi and Reid) accomplished health care reform - something that has eluded administrations for over a century. It matters not that the ACA is based on a conservative idea, or the Massachusetts plan enacted during the administration of the pillar of principle, Mittens Romney (yes, Mr. Trump I'd love to be S of S after blasting your candidacy!). Their hypocrisy, immorality and obsession is both shameful and pathological.
4
Plain and simple: The GOP is hideous...
4
Comparing apples to oranges is either the argument of a fool or a liar. The GOP's pretense of "overhauling" national health care legislation for the public good to repeal Obamacare is a lie. The Dems' passage of the law was an act of public service. The GOP cares not about public health or public service. Trumpcare is no more than the theft of resources for the rich. The longer this macabre spectacle continues the better Obamacare looks. Sunlight is the best disinfectant. Instead of a shell game the GOP moderates would do best to admit failure to save their jobs from middle class retribution in 2018.
Trump is obviously useless and the GOP anti-Obamacare narrative needs to be harried, attacked, and thoroughly discredited as the real fake news ("Fool me once..."). When faced with health care genocide we the people will likely not continue to be fools. The GOP is thoroughly exposed as liars. And they can keep their oranges; particularly the big mendacious one at the top of the pile.
Trump is obviously useless and the GOP anti-Obamacare narrative needs to be harried, attacked, and thoroughly discredited as the real fake news ("Fool me once..."). When faced with health care genocide we the people will likely not continue to be fools. The GOP is thoroughly exposed as liars. And they can keep their oranges; particularly the big mendacious one at the top of the pile.
57
Re the ACA you forgot to mention the biggest lies are coming from Paul Ryan (or lyin' Paul Ryan as he is known in his home town)---"it's a death spiral...a spectacular failure...collapsing as we speak," and so on. http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2017/feb/01/paul-ryan/pau...
2
Why does anyone care what the Senate does?
Nothing has changed in years.
If it passes the Senate with 51 votes, it can't pass the House with the Freedom Caucus. If it passes the House Freedom Caucus it won't pass the Senate w/51 votes.
Nothing has changed in years.
If it passes the Senate with 51 votes, it can't pass the House with the Freedom Caucus. If it passes the House Freedom Caucus it won't pass the Senate w/51 votes.
More bunk and spin from The Times. Can you keep your own doctor on Obamacare? No. Did your family save $2500 a year by choosing Obamacare? No. Is your coverage better and more diverse using Obamacare than your previous healthcare provider? What alternate universe is The Times talking about? It is certainly not the every day experiences of people who were hoodwinked by Obama himself into choosing this pack of lies.
6
The Times editors' alternate universe is the one in which they do not have to buy their insurance through ObamaCare exchanges or in the private market. It is a world in which they spend others' money and call it subsidies. It is a place where they get great healthcare coverage a "feel" others will get the same if the editors' simply wish it into existence as Dems did with ObamaCare. It is a haughty and arrogant world of no consequences, no economic costs for false claims. It is a world where 10 million people get Medicaid healthcare coverage and 20 million lose coverage because they can't afford Obama's plans.
3
The members of the Editorial Board live inside a bubble, one of their own making... They know nothing of the real world. They do not live in a world where primary care physicians will no longer accept deal with Medicare, Medicaid or private carriers but are instead moving to a Direct Primary Care practice model. One of the primary reasons: the ACA requires people to pay for coverages they don't need and yet manages to add more time consuming and utterly useless billing procedures and paperwork to what had even before been a bureaucratic nightmare... The DPC model requires patients to in effect retain a family physician for a fixed annual or monthly fee for primary care, and in theory frees them to buy Insurance only for specialist and hospital services. In other words, people are free to buy what they need and not what the government tells them they must buy...
You misunderstand the nature of private insurance. Insurers change their lists of eligible providers every year. It has nothing to do with Obamacare, aka the ACA. It has to do with the rates insurers are able to negotiate with various providers in an area. Also, nobody promised that you would pay $2,500 a year less than you did ten years ago. Premiums always go up because medical inflation goes up. What Obamacare has done very successfully is reduce the cost curve of medical inflation.
It seems to me that the elite are those who want to eliminate universal coverage. Many of these writers receive health insurance through their employers and never acknowledge that their insurance is entirely subsidized by taxpayers.
It seems to me that the elite are those who want to eliminate universal coverage. Many of these writers receive health insurance through their employers and never acknowledge that their insurance is entirely subsidized by taxpayers.
I’m in favor of any health plan that requires Republicans to donate their brains to science, so we can find out what’s in them.
1
Yo, editorialists, here's a tip for next time: If you write a hed that says, "Obamacare is not collapsing," what will most readers take away from it?
That Obamacare *is* collapsing.
Why? Because they'll breeze right past the "not." And you'll have simply reinforced a falsehood.
As anyone who tangles with trolls will attest, you must engage asymmetrically.
State your opposition affirmatively, Obamacare is healthy, thank you.
It gets easier with practice. Start now.
That Obamacare *is* collapsing.
Why? Because they'll breeze right past the "not." And you'll have simply reinforced a falsehood.
As anyone who tangles with trolls will attest, you must engage asymmetrically.
State your opposition affirmatively, Obamacare is healthy, thank you.
It gets easier with practice. Start now.
3
Yes, and the headline "ObamaCare is healthy" would compete the lie. Let's count the ways the Times confirms the failures of ObamaCare:
1. Premiums have risen dramatically for everyone, especially the middle class.
2. ObamaCare failed to provide coverage for 40 million to 50 million Americans who don't qualify for Medicaid.
3. The exchanges are collapsing in states with rural populations - where a majority of Americans live.
4. Healthcare costs have risen dramatically for everyone, even those with employer privided plans.
5. You can't keep your doctor.
6. You can't keep your plan.
7. Everyone is paying much more except . . . 10 million new Medicaid users.
1. Premiums have risen dramatically for everyone, especially the middle class.
2. ObamaCare failed to provide coverage for 40 million to 50 million Americans who don't qualify for Medicaid.
3. The exchanges are collapsing in states with rural populations - where a majority of Americans live.
4. Healthcare costs have risen dramatically for everyone, even those with employer privided plans.
5. You can't keep your doctor.
6. You can't keep your plan.
7. Everyone is paying much more except . . . 10 million new Medicaid users.
1
Please read the editorial again, Dan. There are not 40 to 50 million uninsured--that was before passage of the ACA. The exchanges are working well in states that embraced the ACA, where most of the population lives. Most people buying on the exchanges aren't affected by the rising premiums because they receive subsidies.
You're confusing coincidence with causation. Of course healthcare costs continue to rise. They will always continue to rise under our system of private insurance. However, the rate of cost increase has been cut under the ACA.
You're confusing coincidence with causation. Of course healthcare costs continue to rise. They will always continue to rise under our system of private insurance. However, the rate of cost increase has been cut under the ACA.
THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE states that citizens of the US are entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Those rights cannot be enjoyed if people suffer and/or die from treatable medical conditions. The GOP has fought tooth and nail to deprive citizens of their basic human rights by removing millions of citizens of modest means from insurance rolls. The reason given is that the 1% deserve deep tax cuts that will cost many lives among the 99%. Are persons created so unequal that they deserve to die because they happen to be poor? That is what the GOP is proposing. Ironically, the states where there is only one insurance company selling healthcare policies are the move toward a single payor system. The GOP is so obtuse as to be unaware of the trend it has caused in paving the way for a single payor system. Meanwhile the fecklessness leader of the GOP, the Trumpenstein Monster, is on the ropes. I am waiting with baited breath to see the French marching in the streets in protest of Trump's visit. Macron must be aware of his nation's predilection toward massive protests. It's the most popular sport in France, after soccer and fine dining. It is not for nothing that the Marseillaise, the national anthem, ends with a rousing, "aux armes les citoyens!" Take up arms citizens! "Le jour de gloire est arrive!" The day of glory has arrived! Trump will be greeted with a nationwide "bras d'honneur," the French version of flipping the bird.
"THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE states that citizens of the US are entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Those rights cannot be enjoyed if people suffer and/or die from treatable medical conditions."
What a bunch of liberal pablum. Health care is not a right. If you believe that it is, go to any doctor and demand your "right" to medical care without paying for it. If others have to give up their time or assets to provide you your so-called "right", then it's not a right.
What a bunch of liberal pablum. Health care is not a right. If you believe that it is, go to any doctor and demand your "right" to medical care without paying for it. If others have to give up their time or assets to provide you your so-called "right", then it's not a right.
3
Healthcare is a right in every civilized country in the world. Even in the benighted US of A, we don't leave the uninsured to die in the street after being hit by a car. Thus, healthcare is a right. When money becomes more important to you than health you are past being a sentient human being and have become a republican.
2
This is drivel. Unlike Mr. Gruber's initial reliance on people's ignorance of a 2000 plus page bill that even Congress didn't read, enough Americans now have experienced, first hand the disaster that is Obamacare. Whose premiums went down? Who got to keep their doctor? Who doesn't have deductibles so high that they are essentially uninsured, while paying double or even triple the premiums of eight years ago. Meanwhile, the CBO estimates on participation, particularly of young people necessary to prop up the disaster, were as wrong then as they are now. Makes for window dressing of the flaws in this typical antiTrump editorial. You blame Mich McConnell, Trump, and of course, republicans in general for following through on a 'threat' to greatly reduce subsidies to failing insurance markets. They weren't included in the original Affirdable Care Act! You know they were added, by Obamas fiat of course, and probably illegally, or this day would have been reckoned with years ago. What this new administration is actually doing is following up on a promise to provide hair in the way that might approach affordability, unlike the joke foisted on the American people by Obama, Harry Reid, Pelosi and their socialist minions, whose goal it was to ultimately create single payer. It would take 3 more editorials to correct the lies in this one. But your agenda is obvious.
7
Both GOP plans increase the cost of health care for those on the exchanges. The Senate plan would temporarily reduce premiums for healthy individuals while increasing them substantially for the middle-aged and sick. The Senate plan would also tie subsidies to the bronze plan rather than the silver plan, thus doubling out-of-pocket costs.
And both GOP plans would gut Medicaid, especially affecting those in long-term care facilities. The CBO estimates that McConnell's original plan would reduce the federal contribution to Medicaid by 35% by 2036, with that percentage compounding every decade. The new Senate GOP plan keeps the Medicaid gutting intact.
If you truly believe that Republicans plan to provide affordable healthcare, you've been deceived. They're trying to deliver on tax cuts.
And both GOP plans would gut Medicaid, especially affecting those in long-term care facilities. The CBO estimates that McConnell's original plan would reduce the federal contribution to Medicaid by 35% by 2036, with that percentage compounding every decade. The new Senate GOP plan keeps the Medicaid gutting intact.
If you truly believe that Republicans plan to provide affordable healthcare, you've been deceived. They're trying to deliver on tax cuts.
The Republicans hate anything related to Obama; it does not matter if it works.
What shred of evidence did the author give to justify the title? Only one claim: Obamacare is stabilizing! Yet "Many Americans who do not get health insurance through employers have been frustrated with the marketplaces. The launch of HealthCare.gov by the Obama administration was disastrous. And the insurance policies have high deductibles and premiums that are unaffordable to many people, because the law did not provide enough subsidies to middle-income families. Insurers did a poor job designing their policies and suffered big losses initially, forcing them to raise premiums even more. " Despite these being the flaws of ACA, the next paragraph began with "Republicans also weakened the markets ..." The use of "also" suggested the flaws were due to Republicans?
I would agree with the conclusion "they are losing sight of what ought to be their goal: safeguarding the health of their constituents."---if "they" meant both Republicans AND Democrats! "Democrats have said they would be willing to work with Republicans to strengthen the law." Why not explain what exactly did the Democrats propose to strengthen ACA? They also had eight years to do so! In 2018, vote for a congress with only candidates who would work for the people and the country.
I would agree with the conclusion "they are losing sight of what ought to be their goal: safeguarding the health of their constituents."---if "they" meant both Republicans AND Democrats! "Democrats have said they would be willing to work with Republicans to strengthen the law." Why not explain what exactly did the Democrats propose to strengthen ACA? They also had eight years to do so! In 2018, vote for a congress with only candidates who would work for the people and the country.
4
I have refrained from weighing in on the Health Care issue being bandied about in congress. However, as a physician i can no longer remain silent.
Do these legislators really think that giving individuals a choice to chose their health care plan of coverage is a realistic concept?! Do they really think people know or have any idea what kind of malady or disease they will be afflicted with in the future, and what kind of coverage they will need?
It's incredible that these smart, learned men and women who make up our congress do not understand that no one knows what their future holds!
As an oncologist, let me give the readers and congress who are deliberating on this important issue an example: the young athlete who finished college and is now out in society on his own and chooses a "bear bones" health care policy; he is in good share and has not had any health problems in the past. Two years later he comes to me and is diagnosed with acute leukemia,
requiring extensive chemotherapy, a bone marrow transplant and careful, frequent long term follow up. --- Who do you think pays for treatment and follow up? Clearly not his coverage policy! Thus, this notion that people can chose their own health care coverage policy is incredibly naive!!
Do these legislators really think that giving individuals a choice to chose their health care plan of coverage is a realistic concept?! Do they really think people know or have any idea what kind of malady or disease they will be afflicted with in the future, and what kind of coverage they will need?
It's incredible that these smart, learned men and women who make up our congress do not understand that no one knows what their future holds!
As an oncologist, let me give the readers and congress who are deliberating on this important issue an example: the young athlete who finished college and is now out in society on his own and chooses a "bear bones" health care policy; he is in good share and has not had any health problems in the past. Two years later he comes to me and is diagnosed with acute leukemia,
requiring extensive chemotherapy, a bone marrow transplant and careful, frequent long term follow up. --- Who do you think pays for treatment and follow up? Clearly not his coverage policy! Thus, this notion that people can chose their own health care coverage policy is incredibly naive!!
8
"Thus, this notion that people can chose their own health care coverage policy is incredibly naive!!"
So, what's your solution?
So, what's your solution?
1
Amen. The concept of insurance is using actuarial mathematics of a large group to share risk over time. As almost all Western nations except the USA have discovered this is best applied by the government that minimizes administrative fees, wild fluctuations in cost and quality, maintains portability and the productivity of it's citizens and prevent social and financial catastrophe. This preclude gamesmanship and confusion by the marketplace's search for profits at the expense of the general public health.
2
One is not to let people freeload. It is not fair or economical to let people buy insurance after the flood.
The issue of insurers pulling out of markets would have been avoided if the original ACA bill kept the Public Option ini the mix. The insurers were frightened that the public option would b 10-15% cheeper because the administrative and profit cost would be avoided, so they lobbied and made some concessions to get congress to take out that competitive alternative. Offering a public option as part of the fix would lower premiums, fix the distribution problem, and temper the outlandish profits of the private insures.
4
GOP and trump supporters are more against Obama than Obamacare, thus they HAVE to repeal it ! as for what will replace it, and whether it better protect most Americans , they don't really care .
2
I pay $400/month in premiums for a gold level plan that doesnt cover the medicine I take, suboxone. I pay $300/month cash for my suboxone, plus the premiums that cover nothing.
$700/month for healthcare for a healthy 29 year old person is too much. My rent is only $750/month!
Obamacare is horrible. The only thing that isnt horrible is socialized medicine. Im tired of making United Healthcare money.
$700/month for healthcare for a healthy 29 year old person is too much. My rent is only $750/month!
Obamacare is horrible. The only thing that isnt horrible is socialized medicine. Im tired of making United Healthcare money.
4
Once you're free of your opioid addiction that $300 per month goes away, doesn't it? Seems like it should be covered, though
1
$400/month for a gold plan is very cheap. Can you really not find a plan that covers your drug?
I agree that the ACA is deeply flawed, and that universal single payer is the only way to go.
I agree that the ACA is deeply flawed, and that universal single payer is the only way to go.
3
"The biggest lie that President Trump and other Republican leaders have been repeating about the Affordable Care Act for years is that it is collapsing, imploding or exploding."
You at the Board conveniently omit all the lies that President Obama told the American people in order to get this legislation passed without a single Republican vote. People did not get to keep their doctors and plans, and their premiums did not drop by an average of $2500 - do you remember those lies?
The other lie you keep propagating is that their are actually "marketplaces". In government-managed health care, their are no marketplaces. If you want an actual market in health care, the first thing that has to happen is to repeal the mandates - not just for individuals, but for employers.
"His earlier proposal would take health insurance away from 22 million people and raise premiums for millions of others..."
Excuse me, but part of that 22 million include those who didn't want to sign up in the first place. And premiums rose for millions after the passage of the ACA, which is this another lie of omission on your part.
"...the law did not provide enough subsidies to middle-income families."
"Subsidies" mean taxpayer support, right? Like most liberals, you at the Board have no problem justifying spending other peoples' money.
"...Mr. McConnell and his party have become so blinded by their rage against Obamacare..."
And you are ignorant in thinking that government can fix health care.
You at the Board conveniently omit all the lies that President Obama told the American people in order to get this legislation passed without a single Republican vote. People did not get to keep their doctors and plans, and their premiums did not drop by an average of $2500 - do you remember those lies?
The other lie you keep propagating is that their are actually "marketplaces". In government-managed health care, their are no marketplaces. If you want an actual market in health care, the first thing that has to happen is to repeal the mandates - not just for individuals, but for employers.
"His earlier proposal would take health insurance away from 22 million people and raise premiums for millions of others..."
Excuse me, but part of that 22 million include those who didn't want to sign up in the first place. And premiums rose for millions after the passage of the ACA, which is this another lie of omission on your part.
"...the law did not provide enough subsidies to middle-income families."
"Subsidies" mean taxpayer support, right? Like most liberals, you at the Board have no problem justifying spending other peoples' money.
"...Mr. McConnell and his party have become so blinded by their rage against Obamacare..."
And you are ignorant in thinking that government can fix health care.
4
Obama expected the things he said would happen. It wasn't lying, but poor predictions.
Those 22 million account for a rise in the health of the population. You have no idea how many of those 22 million welcomed health insurance and are in no position to speak for them.
Premiums have always gone up every year, since long before the ACA.
The government runs on what you call "other people's money." All the services you use are paid for by taxes. Healthcare should be a human right in a civilized society.
Every other Western country has some form of government-run healthcare. Their coverage is greater than that of the United States as well as cheaper.
In the US, Medicare and Medicaid and the VA are government run health services that have saved millions of lives and kept millions more from bankruptcy.
Those 22 million account for a rise in the health of the population. You have no idea how many of those 22 million welcomed health insurance and are in no position to speak for them.
Premiums have always gone up every year, since long before the ACA.
The government runs on what you call "other people's money." All the services you use are paid for by taxes. Healthcare should be a human right in a civilized society.
Every other Western country has some form of government-run healthcare. Their coverage is greater than that of the United States as well as cheaper.
In the US, Medicare and Medicaid and the VA are government run health services that have saved millions of lives and kept millions more from bankruptcy.
1
@ Jerry Englebach: "Obama expected the things he said would happen. It wasn't lying, but poor predictions."
Obama had no clue as to what the results of passing the ACA would be, but that didn't stop him from spouting nothing but positive predictions. This was a sales pitch with no facts to back it up. That's not poor predictions - it's poor leadership.
"The government runs on what you call "other people's money." All the services you use are paid for by taxes. Healthcare should be a human right in a civilized society."
The Constitution was formed in such a way so as to avoid the over-taxation and over-involvement the colonists endured under British rule. That's why there are so few enumerated powers listed for the federal government. The Founders wisely decided that most of what we now consider national-level problems were to be handled at the state level.
"Every other Western country has some form of government-run healthcare."
And if everyone else jumps off a cliff...
"In the US, Medicare and Medicaid and the VA are government run health services..."
Medicare now costs taxpayers over half a trillion dollars annually. It is not sustainable in its current form. Every attempt at controlling prices have resulted in failure. Now we have the ACA...any bets on how much more the taxpayers will be on the hook for that?
Obama had no clue as to what the results of passing the ACA would be, but that didn't stop him from spouting nothing but positive predictions. This was a sales pitch with no facts to back it up. That's not poor predictions - it's poor leadership.
"The government runs on what you call "other people's money." All the services you use are paid for by taxes. Healthcare should be a human right in a civilized society."
The Constitution was formed in such a way so as to avoid the over-taxation and over-involvement the colonists endured under British rule. That's why there are so few enumerated powers listed for the federal government. The Founders wisely decided that most of what we now consider national-level problems were to be handled at the state level.
"Every other Western country has some form of government-run healthcare."
And if everyone else jumps off a cliff...
"In the US, Medicare and Medicaid and the VA are government run health services..."
Medicare now costs taxpayers over half a trillion dollars annually. It is not sustainable in its current form. Every attempt at controlling prices have resulted in failure. Now we have the ACA...any bets on how much more the taxpayers will be on the hook for that?
1
Government has fixed healthcare in virtually the entire civilized world. What has never fixed healthcare is the for-profit healthcare marketplace.
We have ,as voters, put people without a shred of integrity or compassion
In our congress.McConnell,Cruz others you know the list.If they were not in a position of power we might feel a bit of pity for such desire to be cruel,however they personally want to harm millions.
After we remove them from office ,let's pledge to be far more careful about our choices,no matter what party they come from.
Make the ACA succeed beyond our wildest dreams and turn them out of office.
In shame.
In our congress.McConnell,Cruz others you know the list.If they were not in a position of power we might feel a bit of pity for such desire to be cruel,however they personally want to harm millions.
After we remove them from office ,let's pledge to be far more careful about our choices,no matter what party they come from.
Make the ACA succeed beyond our wildest dreams and turn them out of office.
In shame.
1
The Republican sponsored AHCA is a political smoke screen. They have absolutely no interest in passing it. It's political theater so they can say to their constituents, "Well, we tried to replace Obamacare...." What the real Republican plan for Obamacare is, is death by a thousand cuts. Obamacare is currently buried under the weight of Republican lawsuits against it which destabalizes the insurance market and Trump, true to form, is threatening to defund it. Certainly Obamacare needs reworking, but Republicans just want it to go away.
None of the Republican plans have much to do with actual healthcare. They all have to do with reducing the Federal government's role in this industry, cutting benefits for the poorer and sicker amongst us, and giving the wealthiest among us a gigantic tax cit. Then we'll have a tax reform bill that will cut taxes for the rich and corporations even more, and force the rest of us to grovel.
3
The rude rabid Republican't attempts to kill Obamacare and, by default, X0000s of ill and innocent Americans, is not just a symptom of sick or incoherent ideology. A large part of the rationale is actually quite clear, even to themselves, and devious to objective observers. A quintessential m.o. of a successful corporation, as if it's a law of nature, is strict control: of the assembly processes, of personnel, inventory, public relations and perceptions, and so on. The loss of control for even a short time may eventually result in the death of the enterprise. But there is control to maintain stability and reliability--and then there is dictatorial, relentless control, in which control itself is the product. And the Republican'ts want to control a nation of debtors and slaves.
The Republican'ts are an extension of the corporate compulsion--and I probably mean that in a Freudian sense--to control everything around. Not Public Service. Not teamwork, partnership, compromise. Surely not altruism. The Greatest Good for the Greatest Number? What's that? The Republican't wizards take cues from their control-freak benefactors--ALEC, the NRA, the Kochs, et al--and pass all costs along. A citizenry that has true freedom of choice, that is not controlled, is thus not dominated and does not look for its cues, its identity or even its well-being outside themselves. But the Republican'ts want more slaves than citizens, and slaves don't get healthcare.
The Republican'ts are an extension of the corporate compulsion--and I probably mean that in a Freudian sense--to control everything around. Not Public Service. Not teamwork, partnership, compromise. Surely not altruism. The Greatest Good for the Greatest Number? What's that? The Republican't wizards take cues from their control-freak benefactors--ALEC, the NRA, the Kochs, et al--and pass all costs along. A citizenry that has true freedom of choice, that is not controlled, is thus not dominated and does not look for its cues, its identity or even its well-being outside themselves. But the Republican'ts want more slaves than citizens, and slaves don't get healthcare.
1
These Republican members of Congress are despicable. They are planning to commit manslaughter with depraved indifference against American citizens. A 20-year prison sentence for McConnell, Ryan, Meadows and Price. That is what they deserve if their disaster of a "health plan" gets passed.
3
The Republicans care only about maintaining power, and they feel no hint of remorse as they cause avoidable suffering through their malfeasance. They could easily put their best people on legislation that might improve the status quo, but they have chosen to double-down on their strategy of making us all as miserable as possible so they can thump their chests and force whatever garbage they come up with down our throats.
Meanwhile, their base employs selective amnesia, pretending things were just great before ACA came along. We're doomed to all the same failures and worse.
I'm glad I'll be eligible for Medicare in a few years.
Meanwhile, their base employs selective amnesia, pretending things were just great before ACA came along. We're doomed to all the same failures and worse.
I'm glad I'll be eligible for Medicare in a few years.
1
Why isn't this information being shouted out from the roof tops? Where is the Democratic leadership? The total lack of an alternate voice in this process is frustrating.
2
It's not? Who are you talking to? Clearly you are not talking to anyone who has to foot their own insurance bill. You are clearly not talking to anyone in the NY insurance market who received notice that their premiums were going up yet again, this time about 34% pushing their total premiums completely out of reach and unaffordable? As far as I am concerned Obamacare has been a complete disaster. I cannot afford these insane prices, so I will be getting an extremely inferior plan with more sane prices, if I can find one. So basically, I have worse care, for more money. Good job Obama.
13
TD, you are the exception and not the rule. Yes, some of you are paying more for insurance, but those problems are easily fixable. A stronger mandate will create a healthier pool and drive down premiums for everyone. Offering a public option, such as being able to sign up for Medicare before turning 65, would force insurance to compete and would ensure that everyone could get affordable coverage. If these thing happened, subsidies would not have to increase and may even decrease.
1
My situation is the rule for anyone who does not get insurance from their employer and has to go into the market. My situation is the rule for anyone who is not getting their healthcare paid for or subsidized by the government. It is the rule for every self employed person. Premiums have been skyrocketing since Obamacare took over. If it was fixable, why didn't Obama fix it?
2
I was self employed when the ACA was enacted, now retired. My wife was on the ACA until she turned 65 last year. Her monthly premiums actually decreased about $300 per month from the individual coverage she had before the ACA. Every story is different, none of us is "typical." Yes, it can be fixed, but there is strong resistance to this from Republicans and, of course, the insurance industry.
3
I would not be surprised to learn that Republicans have conspired with big insurance company executives to withdraw from the exchanges in order to build their case that the ACA is "in a death spiral" and therefore needs repealing to "save" those unfortunates in the affected markets. Since insurance companies are big campaign donors and benefactors of Republican policies, I'm sure they would be glad to help their friends in Congress in this way.
1
The branding of the ACA as "Obama Care" by Fox has provided half the country with a reason to dislike it...so for pete's sake please stop helping them demonize the plan they could get passed....actually to be accurate it really is more "Mitt Romney Care" so please just "ACA" will make it more palatable to the general public.....Obama does not care.
2
There are several problems with the A.C. A., but all of them are fixable. Two of the bigger problems - insurers dropping out and uncertainty about subsidies can be easily remedied. If there were a public option so that insurance could be purchased from the Government, the specter of private companies pulling out would be an afterthought. If subsidies were guaranteed, like cost of living increases in Social Security, the concern that a president or Congress would not authorize continuing subsidies would also be removed.
3
NYT is being disingenuous when it says "repealing provisions meant to stabilize them" without disclosing that those "provisions" are nothing more than massive giveaways of federal tax dollars in addition to those ALREADY being provided as direct subsidies to those using the exchanges. Obamacare is nothing more than the latest hugely expensive lib entitlement program.
6
What liberals (and many independents and even some conservatives) wanted and want isn't Obamacare but single payer. That means increasing taxes on all citizens, all while eliminating the middle man so ending up paying less for health care than what citizens and the US as a whole was paying in premiums and deductibles per capita.
Trying to cover everyone all while keeping the private insurance system was the best that the GOP and its think thanks could come up with, even though its more expensive than single payer ... until Obama signed exactly that into law, and they now only have one thing to offer: to allow health insurance companies to get higher margins of profit again, all while cutting the health insurance of 22 million Americans.
Fact is, there are only two options: either you allow private companies to make big profits out of health insurance, but then you need a lot of taxpayer money to keep premiums affordable for the middle class and the poor, or you eliminate profits and as such overall costs, so that it becomes cheaper to be insured for everyone ...
Trumpcare tries a "third way", which means forgetting about health care and simply signing a bill into law that enriches insurers' CEOs and their stockholders, and that's it. Problem: almost 4 out of 5 Americans reject such an anti-healthcare healthcare bill, as being a HEBINO ... a healthcare bill in name only.
Trying to cover everyone all while keeping the private insurance system was the best that the GOP and its think thanks could come up with, even though its more expensive than single payer ... until Obama signed exactly that into law, and they now only have one thing to offer: to allow health insurance companies to get higher margins of profit again, all while cutting the health insurance of 22 million Americans.
Fact is, there are only two options: either you allow private companies to make big profits out of health insurance, but then you need a lot of taxpayer money to keep premiums affordable for the middle class and the poor, or you eliminate profits and as such overall costs, so that it becomes cheaper to be insured for everyone ...
Trumpcare tries a "third way", which means forgetting about health care and simply signing a bill into law that enriches insurers' CEOs and their stockholders, and that's it. Problem: almost 4 out of 5 Americans reject such an anti-healthcare healthcare bill, as being a HEBINO ... a healthcare bill in name only.
Do you think only "libs" get sick or have accidents?
The ACA is a conservative cave to the Republican Business Party that allows insurance and pharmaceutical companies to earn unlimited profits at the expense of sick people. The modest standards of care and chintzy subsidies are much too conservative.
Every nation in the world that offers national health care is poorer than we are. If they can afford it, we can.
Watching Republicans in the Senate try to pass a dreadful bill that denies coverage to so many and that affects so large a percentage of the national economy by a slim 50-50 partican vote is more than one can bear.
When did we stop being a government for the people?
Every nation in the world that offers national health care is poorer than we are. If they can afford it, we can.
Watching Republicans in the Senate try to pass a dreadful bill that denies coverage to so many and that affects so large a percentage of the national economy by a slim 50-50 partican vote is more than one can bear.
When did we stop being a government for the people?
5
Correct the ACA is not collapsing, imploding or exploding it did that a long time ago and now we have a government system that is nothing but a money pit helping very few. The government should stay away from trying to manage health care as far as they can because you cannot run a program that relies on how happy the voters are with it. They should pass laws to help the sick and poor and the consumer of health insurance and that is as far as they should go.
2
"(The government" should pass laws too help the sick and poor and the consumer of health insurance..." Um, that's what the ACA is all about, no? And that's what the GOP is doing, too--except their bill also cuts taxes on the wealthy, and pays for it by reducing the help the sick and poor would receive.
1
The "very few" you refer to includes many millions on Medicare and Medicaid and veterans who use the VA.
And the ACA was an attempt to do just what you advocate. Its shortcomings are not that it is a "money pit," but that it doesn't cut out the middleman insurance companies, doesn't cover everyone who needs it, and is a poor substitute for single payer.
And the ACA was an attempt to do just what you advocate. Its shortcomings are not that it is a "money pit," but that it doesn't cut out the middleman insurance companies, doesn't cover everyone who needs it, and is a poor substitute for single payer.
2
Let the market determine the faith of Obamacare. Based on the number of sick members, raising premiums will be the only way to save the program... or raising taxes. A long way from Obama's promises for sure.
2
Letting the market decide healthcare is a fool's game, rigged by the insurance companies and their Republican lackeys. Money is more important than life to these guys.
I suppose that a central element of a dysfunctional and unsustainable healthcare framework that is nevertheless not bankrupting us this instant can be argued as "working reasonably well" so long as the day of ultimate reckoning is more than a month or two in the future. After all, as long as we can forever increase taxes to pay for it so that we become about nothing BUT healthcare as a nation, forget about education, infrastructure, public housing, basic research, policing and defense ... then it's all hunky-dory. Right?
The ACA isn't and never was a workable approach to high-quality, sustainable healthcare for Americans: it is and always was a festering carbuncle on the backside of a Medicaid that fewer doctors accept every year and that for years has been eviscerating our states' ability to fund traditional responsibilities, such as education and infrastructure. Illinois and Chicago are not bankrupts only because they say they're not, New Jersey is only one step behind them, and Medicaid played a big part in that -- so much so that Illinois was forced repeatedly to freeze enrollments and roll back levels of benefits so it could PRETEND to be solvent for awhile longer.
Editorial attempts at obfuscation notwithstanding, healthcare is killing us, and ObamaCare not only hasn't helped SOLVE the problem but has added to its severity. Repealing it would be like putting down a blind dog with fourth-stage cancer and living in intense pain.
The ACA isn't and never was a workable approach to high-quality, sustainable healthcare for Americans: it is and always was a festering carbuncle on the backside of a Medicaid that fewer doctors accept every year and that for years has been eviscerating our states' ability to fund traditional responsibilities, such as education and infrastructure. Illinois and Chicago are not bankrupts only because they say they're not, New Jersey is only one step behind them, and Medicaid played a big part in that -- so much so that Illinois was forced repeatedly to freeze enrollments and roll back levels of benefits so it could PRETEND to be solvent for awhile longer.
Editorial attempts at obfuscation notwithstanding, healthcare is killing us, and ObamaCare not only hasn't helped SOLVE the problem but has added to its severity. Repealing it would be like putting down a blind dog with fourth-stage cancer and living in intense pain.
3
What Republicans incrementally propose in their need to repeal begins to appear more and more like the ACA with every turn of the screw -- so why bother? Instead, take the bit in conservative teeth and re-imagine a healthcare for America that works and is sustainable.
That's not Ryan's version or McConnell's (v.3), but it's not the ACA and everything else, either. It needs to be truly transformative. It needs to extend on a single-payer basis basic healthcare (not insurance) for ALL Americans, with everything else obtainable as insurance on subsidized exchanges. Services one receives in emergency rooms and outpatient clinics, regular check-ups, life-saving care and generic drugs associated with these services. NOT "Medicare for all", because that simply winds up making us all about healthcare as a nation, as well.
In return for the replacement, repeal Medicare, Medicaid, the healthcare components of Social Security, the ACA, the "basic" part of employer-provided and the state accretions. Use the money instead to fund the replacement, and, yes, additional taxes probably will be required even with streamlining effects and dedicating collections to the new program. The bankrupting use of Medicaid as the dumping ground for funding nursing home care for our elderly needs to be addressed as a separate issue.
If Republicans want to keep their majorities, they need to prove that they have more of a clue than Democrats who failed so dreadfully before them.
That's not Ryan's version or McConnell's (v.3), but it's not the ACA and everything else, either. It needs to be truly transformative. It needs to extend on a single-payer basis basic healthcare (not insurance) for ALL Americans, with everything else obtainable as insurance on subsidized exchanges. Services one receives in emergency rooms and outpatient clinics, regular check-ups, life-saving care and generic drugs associated with these services. NOT "Medicare for all", because that simply winds up making us all about healthcare as a nation, as well.
In return for the replacement, repeal Medicare, Medicaid, the healthcare components of Social Security, the ACA, the "basic" part of employer-provided and the state accretions. Use the money instead to fund the replacement, and, yes, additional taxes probably will be required even with streamlining effects and dedicating collections to the new program. The bankrupting use of Medicaid as the dumping ground for funding nursing home care for our elderly needs to be addressed as a separate issue.
If Republicans want to keep their majorities, they need to prove that they have more of a clue than Democrats who failed so dreadfully before them.
3
Tell us how you really feel. What you said.
3
ACA has helped, although it has not SOLVED the problem. To SOLVE the problem, ignore the Republicans and bring on Single Payer with cost controls like the rest of the civilized world has.
2
The White House was (and might still be) asking people to share their Obamacare horror stories. I shared mine with them, and here's the short form:
I'm an independent businessman who finds the federal exchange a very convenient way to shop for insurance, having over 25 plans for me to choose from here in Chicago. My premiums have been stable and this year's deductible is lower than prior years. I've changed plans frequently (the state co-op went bankrupt one year) but when I had corporate healthcare the plans changed frequently, too.
I'm doing well enough to not need the subsidies, but don't begrudge them to others who do qualify.
Given the massive expense that insurers and healthcare providers would have to bear to tear out what they've implemented for ACA just to bow to the spite of the GOP, realistically the financially prudent thing to do would be to fix the parts of Obamacare that need fixing.
Have states stop undermining it, for one thing. Put in the government-run option to help people in rural areas where the private market doesn't care to participate. And throwing people off of insurance while the nation (including rural red-state voters) are dealing with an addiction crisis is also not financially prudent, though if it happens I hope voters note who did it to them.
I don't expect the Administration to promote this horror story, but since they asked, I sent it in.
I'm an independent businessman who finds the federal exchange a very convenient way to shop for insurance, having over 25 plans for me to choose from here in Chicago. My premiums have been stable and this year's deductible is lower than prior years. I've changed plans frequently (the state co-op went bankrupt one year) but when I had corporate healthcare the plans changed frequently, too.
I'm doing well enough to not need the subsidies, but don't begrudge them to others who do qualify.
Given the massive expense that insurers and healthcare providers would have to bear to tear out what they've implemented for ACA just to bow to the spite of the GOP, realistically the financially prudent thing to do would be to fix the parts of Obamacare that need fixing.
Have states stop undermining it, for one thing. Put in the government-run option to help people in rural areas where the private market doesn't care to participate. And throwing people off of insurance while the nation (including rural red-state voters) are dealing with an addiction crisis is also not financially prudent, though if it happens I hope voters note who did it to them.
I don't expect the Administration to promote this horror story, but since they asked, I sent it in.
4
It is sad to hear Republicans criticize the ACA and predict its imminent demise as they do everything in their power to destroy it. Their hypocrisy is stunning.
What is sadder is that after seven years of promising to repeal and replace the ACA, it is clear that all Republicans have done is promise something that, to date, despite control of Congress and the White House, they are unable to deliver.
The Republicans had about seven years to plan a replacement and recruit support for their replacement. I guess they were too busy selling "Repeal and replace" and obstructing anything and everything that President Obama and the Democrats wanted to do.
The only excuse I have heard for their failure was provided by Senator Pat
Toomey (R-PA) recently: "I didn't think Trump would win."
What is sadder is that after seven years of promising to repeal and replace the ACA, it is clear that all Republicans have done is promise something that, to date, despite control of Congress and the White House, they are unable to deliver.
The Republicans had about seven years to plan a replacement and recruit support for their replacement. I guess they were too busy selling "Repeal and replace" and obstructing anything and everything that President Obama and the Democrats wanted to do.
The only excuse I have heard for their failure was provided by Senator Pat
Toomey (R-PA) recently: "I didn't think Trump would win."
6
Why can't the insurance companies sell policies across state lines? I thought that this was a capitalist economy.
Unfortunately it appears that a primary component of capitalism is manipulating the market to your advantage. This goes along with lying, cheating and misrepresenting. It is not a free market.
Unfortunately it appears that a primary component of capitalism is manipulating the market to your advantage. This goes along with lying, cheating and misrepresenting. It is not a free market.
2
In part, because no one would accept your insurance from Oklahoma, if you live in Maine. So, if they open up the door to any insurance company selling anywhere, you might have insurance, but no doctor who accepts it.
Furthermore,
"Under [Obamacare], Section 1333 permits states to form health care choice inter-state compacts to allow insurers to sell policies in any state participating in the compact. Two or more states may enter into compacts under which one or more insurance plans may be offered in the such states, subject to the laws and regulations of the state in which it was written."
So, currently, interstate sales are permitted, but not required. Apparently, contrary to the rhetoric, the health insurance industry isn't interested. It gets very complicated for a health insurance company to establish relationships with health care providers in areas where they have few, if any, insured.
"Under [Obamacare], Section 1333 permits states to form health care choice inter-state compacts to allow insurers to sell policies in any state participating in the compact. Two or more states may enter into compacts under which one or more insurance plans may be offered in the such states, subject to the laws and regulations of the state in which it was written."
So, currently, interstate sales are permitted, but not required. Apparently, contrary to the rhetoric, the health insurance industry isn't interested. It gets very complicated for a health insurance company to establish relationships with health care providers in areas where they have few, if any, insured.
1
Insurance companies don't sell health insurance across state lines for the same reason they don't sell automobile insurance across state lines. Your policy must conform to the regulations of your state. Also, insurance companies enter into contracts with individual providers in every locality. An insurance company operating from Alabama isn't in a position to negotiate with local providers in Honolulu. It's completely impractical, and no private insurer would agree to do it.
This isn't market manipulation. It's common sense.
This isn't market manipulation. It's common sense.
ACA works fine as long as you are either not in the middle class or never aspire to rise to the middle class.
When the premiums for health insurance (not health care, health INSURANCE) now are higher than my mortgage payment, that's a problem.
When you list state after state where you term the markets as "fragile", one wonders what you're smoking in that NY ivory tower.
Call it what it is - a giveaway to insurance and big pharma that did nothing to rein in the costs.
When the premiums for health insurance (not health care, health INSURANCE) now are higher than my mortgage payment, that's a problem.
When you list state after state where you term the markets as "fragile", one wonders what you're smoking in that NY ivory tower.
Call it what it is - a giveaway to insurance and big pharma that did nothing to rein in the costs.
4
Faulting Obamacare for not lowering your middle-class premiums is like slamming it for not curing the common cold. If you and the Republicans have a better idea for healthcare than ACA, cough it up. Otherwise stop your carping. What makes you think you have more right to basic healthcare than anyone else? Your innate superiority? You were probably born into the middle class like everybody else. Be thankful if there is still a middle class left after Republican oligarchs and kleptocrats have run things for four years.
1
When health care starts to consume 20% of GDP as is forecast within a decade, I anxiously waits the Grey Lady's follow-on lamenting pouring money down a black hole of free health care for all.
6
True, in the United States universal healthcare may consume 20% of GDP. Nowhere else in the world. Unfortunately the fundamental cost will remain high, and no amount of sharing the risk around an insurance pool--or across taxpayers--is going to bring it down. X amount of delivered product requires Y dollars. Having recently spoken to an actuary who's spent her career on this, she points to two culprits in America: Insurance companies add no value, but clip profits as the money passes through; and American doctors are the highest paid (in absolute and relative terms) in the world, with no other nation's doctors having a reasonable expectation of the level of affluence some (10%?) American doctors enjoy. Universal healthcare will get rid of the middleman; universal healthcare might begin to undo the distortions that the AMA built into our healthcare system over the last 75 years. And I like the Maxwell's Equations! (I'm a doctor--of physics)
2
I would much rather provide universal healthcare coverage to every American than bomb civilians in Syria. Why is there no talk about cutting the bloated military budget? Or closing unnecessary military bases in a few red states? A healthy America is good business for everyone.
10
Republicanism - one of its symptoms is considering wishful thinking reality. They wish that Obamacare would fail and they obviously also wish to install the Senate legislation which they risibly name - "Better" Healthcare. Risible because it is actually a death bill. On second thought, maybe that's not so amusing.
3
It appears that McConnell has done just enough bribing and cajoling to get this dog of a bill through the Senate.
Elsewhere it is reported that the latest version of the bill will include an additional $45 billion to combat opiod abuse. Such an inclusion is pure politics designed to keep Senators Portman (Ohio), Capito (WV) and Murkowski (Alaska) from voting against the bill. The inclusion of Cruz' stupid plan is meant to buy him off; next, we will see something for Susan Collins to get her on board.
So at this point, that leaves two Senators voting no on the bill (Paul and Heller), resulting in an even split, with Pastor Mike Pence casting the tie-breaking vote in favor of a bill favored by something like 15% of the electorate.
From a guy who stole a Supreme Court seat, and will now set health care coverage back substantially, it is all in a good day's work,
Elsewhere it is reported that the latest version of the bill will include an additional $45 billion to combat opiod abuse. Such an inclusion is pure politics designed to keep Senators Portman (Ohio), Capito (WV) and Murkowski (Alaska) from voting against the bill. The inclusion of Cruz' stupid plan is meant to buy him off; next, we will see something for Susan Collins to get her on board.
So at this point, that leaves two Senators voting no on the bill (Paul and Heller), resulting in an even split, with Pastor Mike Pence casting the tie-breaking vote in favor of a bill favored by something like 15% of the electorate.
From a guy who stole a Supreme Court seat, and will now set health care coverage back substantially, it is all in a good day's work,
5
28 million are currently uninsured. Apparently those don’t include people ‘who will die’, unlike those among the 22 million additional uninsured under the GOP plan. The uninsured are evidently also partisan, as ‘our uninsured aren’t as sick and won’t die like your uninsured’.
4
And then there are the Obamacare refugees who are technically "insured" but really "uninsured" since they cannot afford to access their care. Under the GOP plan, they will move into the technically "uninsured" column. Still no access to health care but not paying exorbitant premiums.
1
this can't go well because the republican party is the party of abject failure for all but the 1%
1
I am a 70 year old retired physician who has always dreamt of a universal health insurance since good health care cannot be a profit based enterprise due to the massive conflict of interest that intrinsically are present when charging a patient for his or her care. By the way a sick person is not a client but a patient ! Health care is a human right and not a private purchase of a more costly or less expensive plan. It is barbaric to use sickness as a way of making money in any planet or galaxy in this universe. A care giver,medical supplier and care taker must have a closeness with God and a sacred tenderness in their heart to move humanity to a peaceful harmony. Medicine is an art and a science and not a business.
114
Well said. Former Governor of Vermont and physician Howard Dean once said that the problem is that a patient with great insurance is an excellent revenue source, and a chronically sick patient with great insurance is a golden ticket.
1
The Insurers played on the public's suspicions of large corporations beautifully. During the lead-up to the ACA's passage, you couldn't find an insurance company in favor of it. Afterwards, it was the best thing since sliced bread, according to all the insurance companies. Why the change of heart? And why the "success" now?
1) The ACA guarantees Insurance companies eternal revenue. Their product, the only product they sell (insurance plans), is now a mandated purchase for ALL citizens. They don't have to worry about any sales targets. As long as Americans keep pumping out living human beings, they will continue to see their revenue grow. Simply existing as a US Citizen lines their pockets, because of the individual mandate.
2) The insurance exchanges wouldn't have stayed insolvent forever. Why? Because the individual mandate fixes the primary issue with the exchanges: risk pooling. When the exchanges first started, they were flooded with high-risk patients as a result of the nature of health insurance prior to the ACA. Statistically speaking, the at-risk populations are the poor and those with pre-existing conditions. The exchanges introduced these demographics to the risk pool on a limited basis by quarantining them in a way. As generations grow up, they enter the exchanges too. Healthy young people balance the risk pool over time.
You all got played like a fiddle, because you couldn't understand that health insurance =/= health care.
1) The ACA guarantees Insurance companies eternal revenue. Their product, the only product they sell (insurance plans), is now a mandated purchase for ALL citizens. They don't have to worry about any sales targets. As long as Americans keep pumping out living human beings, they will continue to see their revenue grow. Simply existing as a US Citizen lines their pockets, because of the individual mandate.
2) The insurance exchanges wouldn't have stayed insolvent forever. Why? Because the individual mandate fixes the primary issue with the exchanges: risk pooling. When the exchanges first started, they were flooded with high-risk patients as a result of the nature of health insurance prior to the ACA. Statistically speaking, the at-risk populations are the poor and those with pre-existing conditions. The exchanges introduced these demographics to the risk pool on a limited basis by quarantining them in a way. As generations grow up, they enter the exchanges too. Healthy young people balance the risk pool over time.
You all got played like a fiddle, because you couldn't understand that health insurance =/= health care.
2
This is a distinction without a difference. In the U.S. health insurance equals access to health care.
I don't think anyone was played. We all knew that the ACA was a plan that relied on the private insurance system, but that it would insure millions of people. Had Joe Lieberman not been a senator, we could have passed the public option.
Politics is the art of the possible. Always.
I don't think anyone was played. We all knew that the ACA was a plan that relied on the private insurance system, but that it would insure millions of people. Had Joe Lieberman not been a senator, we could have passed the public option.
Politics is the art of the possible. Always.
So paying $1200 a month plus $10k deductible is not imploding, or exploding. Sure it's a down right success.
6
Sure such policies exist. Blame the ACA. See what products are available after it's gone. Rethink your analysis.
1
Where do you live in New York? You're talking about a bronze plan, but I've never heard of a bronze plan costing $1,200 a month for a single person, nor have I heard of one with a $10,000 deductible. This claim sounds dubious.
However, your complaint is that the ACA didn't reduce costs enough. I think everyone agrees. If the ACA had never passed, you would be paying the same rates for high-deductible plans.
However, your complaint is that the ACA didn't reduce costs enough. I think everyone agrees. If the ACA had never passed, you would be paying the same rates for high-deductible plans.
Obamacare Is Not Collapsing, Imploding or Exploding - it's just going away!
So that's how the NYT's determines the success of the ACA, by how well insurance companies are doing? Doesn't that tell you something? Say, for instance, that health care remains unaffordable, and therefore inaccessible to many, in the U.S.
It's been my experience that supporters of the unaffordable care act either are not subject to it or had absolutely no insurance previously. Those of us who had been paying for it ourselves are worse off than before. I'm not suggesting that it be repealed, but rather that it was a failure from the start because its priority was to preserve the health of private insurers rather than to provide health care to its citizenry.
It's been my experience that supporters of the unaffordable care act either are not subject to it or had absolutely no insurance previously. Those of us who had been paying for it ourselves are worse off than before. I'm not suggesting that it be repealed, but rather that it was a failure from the start because its priority was to preserve the health of private insurers rather than to provide health care to its citizenry.
6
Uh ... where to start ... ?
Maybe with the headline. This article is about Obamacare "collapsing" and "imploding", two words often used by Republicans in order to describe what to them is happening on the individual market, namely no more Obamacare insurers and plans available in most states because it is no longer profitable for insurers to do so. Why is it no longer profitable? Because they had to increase premiums so much that nobody can afford them anymore.
So IF you want to test the "collapsing" hypothesis, the main question is: is Obamacare really not profitable for insurers, so that they have to ask unaffordable premiums in order to survive?
As the studies in this article show: no, the answer is that that hypothesis isn't correct, and that the exact opposite is happening. Not only are there today 10 million Americans MORE who can afford to buy insurance on the individual market, since a couple of years now insurers are making profits again, so are interested in continuing to offer Obamacare plans on the exchanges.
And if you look at what Obama said he wanted to do, what the CBO predicted it would do, and what it's currently doing, you cannot deny that this was all about making health insurance accessible for 20 million more Americans, which today it does.
All studies show that premiums still increase, but increases slowed down compared to the pre-ACA era. And thanks to the subsidies and Medicaid expansion, it largely succeeded in providing HC "to its citizenry".
Maybe with the headline. This article is about Obamacare "collapsing" and "imploding", two words often used by Republicans in order to describe what to them is happening on the individual market, namely no more Obamacare insurers and plans available in most states because it is no longer profitable for insurers to do so. Why is it no longer profitable? Because they had to increase premiums so much that nobody can afford them anymore.
So IF you want to test the "collapsing" hypothesis, the main question is: is Obamacare really not profitable for insurers, so that they have to ask unaffordable premiums in order to survive?
As the studies in this article show: no, the answer is that that hypothesis isn't correct, and that the exact opposite is happening. Not only are there today 10 million Americans MORE who can afford to buy insurance on the individual market, since a couple of years now insurers are making profits again, so are interested in continuing to offer Obamacare plans on the exchanges.
And if you look at what Obama said he wanted to do, what the CBO predicted it would do, and what it's currently doing, you cannot deny that this was all about making health insurance accessible for 20 million more Americans, which today it does.
All studies show that premiums still increase, but increases slowed down compared to the pre-ACA era. And thanks to the subsidies and Medicaid expansion, it largely succeeded in providing HC "to its citizenry".
2
Ah, you're from Belgium. Well, as I said, those who support the ACA haven't had personal experience with it. Believe me, if you were subjected to Obamacare in your country, your attitude would be quite different. It's probably wise not to believe everything you read, no matter its source.
And why is the NYT wasting its time responding to the GOP's false claims and scare tactics?
And why is the NYT wasting its time responding to the GOP's false claims and scare tactics?
1
Nobody seems to be asking why some private insurers are leaving some ACA exchanges in some regions and what can be done about it. If any other business, for example telephone companies or airlines, were leaving consumers in certain regions without any service, would Republicans blame Democrats for that dysfunction in a small segment of the national market and seek to dismantle every government regulation and subsidy of the communications and air transportation industries? Or should they use government powers to ensure that consumers in the affected markets get the service that those businesses won't provide? Congress or states can simply require that any health insurance company licensed to sell policies in any state must offer policies on the ACA exchanges. How hard is that? Aetna, UnitedHealth, Humana, Blue Cross and all the other giant health insurers are still very profitable and still pay their executives multi-million-dollar salaries and reward their investors with nice dividends and capital gains. If they lose a little money in a few markets on the exchanges, so what? Their bottom lines are just fine. Clearly, Republicans are just using the withdrawal of insurers from those exchange markets as an excuse. They can fix it, if they want to.
4
"If any other business, for example telephone companies or airlines, were leaving consumers in certain regions without any service, would Republicans blame Democrats for that dysfunction in a small segment of the national market and seek to dismantle every government regulation and subsidy of the communications and air transportation industries?"
Telephone companies are regulated at the state level. Airlines are regulated at the federal level. Would you applaud the Democrats if they forced the airlines to build a JFK-style airport in the middle of Montana and made you pay for it?
The federal government has no clue how to manage a business, and that's what health care is - a business and not a right. The ACA is based on the premise that health care is a right and that you and others should be taxed to provide it. The Constitution neither states nor implies that the federal government can or should compel an individual to buy a product or service, period. The individual mandate is totally unconstitutional.
Telephone companies are regulated at the state level. Airlines are regulated at the federal level. Would you applaud the Democrats if they forced the airlines to build a JFK-style airport in the middle of Montana and made you pay for it?
The federal government has no clue how to manage a business, and that's what health care is - a business and not a right. The ACA is based on the premise that health care is a right and that you and others should be taxed to provide it. The Constitution neither states nor implies that the federal government can or should compel an individual to buy a product or service, period. The individual mandate is totally unconstitutional.
2
"The Constitution neither states nor implies" plenty of things, but they exist in any case...Medicare for all, please...
@ Jim: ""The Constitution neither states nor implies" plenty of things, but they exist in any case...Medicare for all, please..."
Great...how much of your own money are you willing to part with in order to provide this new entitlement?
Great...how much of your own money are you willing to part with in order to provide this new entitlement?
1
Neither the ACA nor these bills address the underlying problem that the healthcare system is too expensive and needs state and federal legals changes to provide high quality, cost effective care. People need to be responsible for living a healthy life style or their cost of care should be higher.
Medicaid is the best insurance coverage in the world. It covers everything, which is why it is so expensive. I am in the individual market and my family insurance is $1000 a month with a $10,000 deductible. Is this really affordable for anyone. This is why so many people stop working and get on Medicaid.
Medicaid is the best insurance coverage in the world. It covers everything, which is why it is so expensive. I am in the individual market and my family insurance is $1000 a month with a $10,000 deductible. Is this really affordable for anyone. This is why so many people stop working and get on Medicaid.
4
That is mostly untrue , most people on Medicaid do work.
4
Can't recall if I read it somewhere, heard in a seminar, 60Minutes,..but that an incentive for the elder to get on Medicaid is to have them stop working, removing them from the employment roles for jobs to be available?
If I'm not recalling correctly or it was in the 1980s; my mistake can be attributed to my lack of Sobriety back then:):)
If I'm not recalling correctly or it was in the 1980s; my mistake can be attributed to my lack of Sobriety back then:):)
The first step to what will ultimately be a single-payer system is for the government to assume the risks of long term and catastrophic care - in much the same way it does with flood insurance - from private insurers. Let the insurers compete over regular, every day coverage, and create a single risk pool - the population of the United States - for long term and catastrophic care.
4
The United States was founded on the principles of freedom and responsibility. For example, freedom to own a gun, with the responsibility of not going around shooting people. Equally, it seems entirely reasonable that to provide another form of "freedom," to paraphrase from a Norman Rockwell image are a freedom from want and a freedom from fear. Providing some form of health insurance for all is removing a want and a fear. But on the other hand, responsibility should dictate that the Government is not your father, he's your Uncle Sam. Medicaid for all provides the ideal solution to this problem. This government program has low overhead costs and expects each individual to purchase supplemental insurance to cover co-pays and prescription drugs. Let the private insurance companies compete to provide the supplemental insurance. This approach fulfills the ethics of the Founding Fathers in parallel with how reasonable people think today about health care.
6
Diseases are not necessarily choices.
2
" Equally, it seems entirely reasonable that to provide another form of "freedom," to paraphrase from a Norman Rockwell image are a freedom from want and a freedom from fear."
Those "freedoms" were mentioned in a speech by FDR in January 1941. "Freedom from want" is nothing more than a license for government to redistribute wealth. "Freedom from fear" is simply misdirection. Look at the arguments from politicians in general and from proponents of the ACA: it's all based on fear. Even after it's been passed Democrats use fear to make recipients apprehensive about losing their new-found entitlement as provided by the ACA.
"Freedom from want" and "freedom from fear" are tools used by government to exert more control.
Those "freedoms" were mentioned in a speech by FDR in January 1941. "Freedom from want" is nothing more than a license for government to redistribute wealth. "Freedom from fear" is simply misdirection. Look at the arguments from politicians in general and from proponents of the ACA: it's all based on fear. Even after it's been passed Democrats use fear to make recipients apprehensive about losing their new-found entitlement as provided by the ACA.
"Freedom from want" and "freedom from fear" are tools used by government to exert more control.
1
I feel very sorry for you, hm. Your factually correct remarks are themselves remarkable because of their sterility. After reading all your responses, I've concluded that you are a Republican-selected apologist, picked to respond negatively to all pro-Obamacare statements. Whatever the purpose implied in our Constitution regarding basic rights, I do not think they are other language for "giveaways". They instead, for me, imply caring for the least among us. Since I think the insurance industry is a profit-based enterprise, as is Big Pharma, their primary interest is in their investors, not the greater good, and I think they are the culprits in the collapse of the insurance markets. Oh, and I would gladly pay more taxes to help fund a single-payer system, especially if the wealthy would also pay their fair share.
1
It's the people's fault.
Raise their rates by 70%, triple their deductibles, make their choice a choice of one, and they will complain...
Raise their rates by 70%, triple their deductibles, make their choice a choice of one, and they will complain...
6
The Republicans seem now to want to create a checkerboard country where people in different states have vastly different health care. No wonder: they also like the Electoral College, where a citizen's vote in one state can carry three times the weight of a vote in other states. Shouldn't the federal government be there to make sure all Americans have the same rights?
4
The claim that Obamacare is collapsing, imploding or exploding - in spite of it being actively sabotaged by the right - is merely a cover for the fact that the Trumps are indeed collapsing, imploding and exploding as the truth about their shenanigans are further exposed.
Lies are an innate part of the GOP DNA - trying to convince everyone that tax cuts for the wealthy is the solution to deficits and jobs, that for some reason their base "believe" this. They try to convince people they are trying to give people "choice" in health care and their base believes them, then they wonder why they can't afford to choose anything or afford to treat the illness they did not choose.
Lies are an innate part of the GOP DNA - trying to convince everyone that tax cuts for the wealthy is the solution to deficits and jobs, that for some reason their base "believe" this. They try to convince people they are trying to give people "choice" in health care and their base believes them, then they wonder why they can't afford to choose anything or afford to treat the illness they did not choose.
4
We as a country need to wake up when it comes to health care for our fellow citizens.
Health care should not be placed in the hands of private, for profit organizations that place returns to their executives and their stockholders above the insurance claims of their policy holders. It's no secret that the most effective and most common way in which profit-oriented health insurance organizations increase the profits for their executives and stockholders is by refusing or challenging policy-holder claims -- not via mergers and promises of more efficient health care coordination.
Like Canada and most progressive European countries we need to take profit out of health care and establish a federal single-payer health care system whose sole purpose is to provide the best health care services possible to all Americans.
And despite the protests of the insurance company and pharmaceutical company lobbyists, it would not be difficult. We already have the foundation for such a health care program in our Medicare program.
Health care should not be placed in the hands of private, for profit organizations that place returns to their executives and their stockholders above the insurance claims of their policy holders. It's no secret that the most effective and most common way in which profit-oriented health insurance organizations increase the profits for their executives and stockholders is by refusing or challenging policy-holder claims -- not via mergers and promises of more efficient health care coordination.
Like Canada and most progressive European countries we need to take profit out of health care and establish a federal single-payer health care system whose sole purpose is to provide the best health care services possible to all Americans.
And despite the protests of the insurance company and pharmaceutical company lobbyists, it would not be difficult. We already have the foundation for such a health care program in our Medicare program.
16
"Most European countries" do not have a federal, single-payer system. The discussion in this country is stalled on left as well as right. We speak as if there is only that one option. There are countries that utilize insuance companies. There are countries with decentralized financing systems. I wish people on the left would start generating multiple, detailed proposals and stop calling just for the vague "single payer."
3
No, Obamacare may not be doing any of the above but it is certainly becoming too expensive for those who are not eligible for subsidies under the low caps on income that are allowed for single people or families. Why should people who are not making money, who may or may not be receiving unemployment, and who are almost certainly trying to rein in their expenses, have to buy health insurance based upon a salary that isn't coming in any longer?
Health insurance in America is a scam even with the ACA. The only health care that is being seen to is that of the health insurance industry, the pharmaceutical industry and its CEOs, and the rest of the wealth care industry. We're paying for their health, not ours. They search for ways not to pay claims, to overcharge for medication, to nickel and dime us with facility fees, user fees, out of network fees, co-pays, deductibles, etc.
If other countries can do universal health care America can too. The real question is what we're willing to pay. I'd rather see the dollars my employer spends on my premium go to a national health care system so that all of us can get the care we need when and where we need it. There is no reason but greed for the current situation to continue. It would be much cheaper and a better public health policy to have universal access and single payor. The only question is when we decide that it's worth it for all of us.
Health insurance in America is a scam even with the ACA. The only health care that is being seen to is that of the health insurance industry, the pharmaceutical industry and its CEOs, and the rest of the wealth care industry. We're paying for their health, not ours. They search for ways not to pay claims, to overcharge for medication, to nickel and dime us with facility fees, user fees, out of network fees, co-pays, deductibles, etc.
If other countries can do universal health care America can too. The real question is what we're willing to pay. I'd rather see the dollars my employer spends on my premium go to a national health care system so that all of us can get the care we need when and where we need it. There is no reason but greed for the current situation to continue. It would be much cheaper and a better public health policy to have universal access and single payor. The only question is when we decide that it's worth it for all of us.
25
Maybe true, but Trump care is not that and the GOP is not considering universal coverage
1
Here in Texas, when I first signed up on the Exchange back in 2013, there were a myriad of companies to choose from. Now, it is only (3). A lot of insurers left the exchange. I was all for it, but I would have to agree that when companies leave in droves, that is collapsing to me.
5
But, in some ways, this could also be due to the free market capitalism that the Republicans espouse. You can either end up with more options and companies, or, due to competition, less. The issue should remain how able Americans are to purchase healthcare at affordable prices (and those prices and the cost of medical care should be EXPLICIT, something neither the Democrats or Republicans have fixed).
3
are you still covered - if you are its not collapsing - also it currently is getting very little support.
1
How does the repeal help your problem? 3 choices to none.
The ACA was badly designed and is collapsing by itself under the strain of its own inefficiencies and internal contradictions without Republican help.
First, an insurance model cannot work for healthcare: Insurance requires minimizing or eliminating risk (i.e. excluding pre-existing conditions and/or charging premiums that compensate for projected payout). Payouts from complications or exacerbations of pre-existing disease are often astronomical (100K to 1M ). Yet the main purpose of insurance is to protect the insured from such catastrophic charges. Insurance companies cannot stay in business if they cannot exclude patients likely to cause a major loss or charge premiums that would compensate for such losses. A different model is needed.
Second, healthcare "markets," upon which the ACA is based, do not exist: When people are ill, they are usually not mentally or physically disposed to shop around for the best value in medical imaging, chemotherapy, surgery, etc. Even if so disposed, healthcare is so complex that most people lack the knowledge needed for effective comparison shopping and would easily be led astray by unscrupulous advertising.
The ACA needs radical reform to become economically viable, not mere tinkering around the margins as the NYT repeatedly asserts. Unfortunately, the Republican Party is too intellectually decrepit and hidebound to outdated Reagan-esque tax cut ideology to do this reform.
If only Ted Kennedy had cooperated with Nixon in 1970.
First, an insurance model cannot work for healthcare: Insurance requires minimizing or eliminating risk (i.e. excluding pre-existing conditions and/or charging premiums that compensate for projected payout). Payouts from complications or exacerbations of pre-existing disease are often astronomical (100K to 1M ). Yet the main purpose of insurance is to protect the insured from such catastrophic charges. Insurance companies cannot stay in business if they cannot exclude patients likely to cause a major loss or charge premiums that would compensate for such losses. A different model is needed.
Second, healthcare "markets," upon which the ACA is based, do not exist: When people are ill, they are usually not mentally or physically disposed to shop around for the best value in medical imaging, chemotherapy, surgery, etc. Even if so disposed, healthcare is so complex that most people lack the knowledge needed for effective comparison shopping and would easily be led astray by unscrupulous advertising.
The ACA needs radical reform to become economically viable, not mere tinkering around the margins as the NYT repeatedly asserts. Unfortunately, the Republican Party is too intellectually decrepit and hidebound to outdated Reagan-esque tax cut ideology to do this reform.
If only Ted Kennedy had cooperated with Nixon in 1970.
8
Please explain about how Ted Kennedy should have cooperated. I don't remember this and I haven't read anything about it.
Ask doctors and nurses what they think. When it was first suggested, I heard a lot of them complain about how bad it was, UNTIL the Republicans got in office and the first and most important thing was to kill it and leave 24 million and up people without any health care. Now the medical staff that I talk to are scared they and the rest of the country may lose what they have and they like what they have. If there are problems with it, those problems need to be fixed instead of throwing the whole thing out. If there was leadership in congress and they could work together for the all people of the US and not the big donors, they could make it the best health care system but this could happen when pigs fly. The money is why they can not work together.
43
You seem very confused about the ACA and healthcare in general.
3
Eliminate employer-provided health insurance.
I don't want my employer, and I certainly not some business owner's "sincerely held religious beliefs", between me and my health care provider.
Not only that, but employer paid insurance places an unfair burden on the employer, is anti-competitive, and contributes no value to the product or service.
Finally, the tax treatment is a huge entitlement; a tax expenditure that drains hundreds of millions of dollars of federal revenue from the income tax. Pay your employees directly what health insurance costs you, they will choose their plan, and they will pay tax on that income that was previously an untaxed benefit.
I don't want my employer, and I certainly not some business owner's "sincerely held religious beliefs", between me and my health care provider.
Not only that, but employer paid insurance places an unfair burden on the employer, is anti-competitive, and contributes no value to the product or service.
Finally, the tax treatment is a huge entitlement; a tax expenditure that drains hundreds of millions of dollars of federal revenue from the income tax. Pay your employees directly what health insurance costs you, they will choose their plan, and they will pay tax on that income that was previously an untaxed benefit.
7
Government insurance has a lot of exemptions due to religious beliefs.
"Single payer for everyone!"
"Medicaid for everyone!"
These are the standard responses to critics of Obamacare. Unfortunately, they do nothing to address the fact that by any objective measure -- versus how well it did or didn't pay for any individual's health care expense -- our current Medicaid system has unsustainable costs and poor outcomes.
Taking the current Medicaid model and extending it to "everyone" would be a disaster for the country, which is why *wanting* single payer is not germaine to anything except wishful thinking.
Wanting something and the ability to make it actually materialize are very different things. When single payer proponents can do better than "cutting out the insurer" and/or "other countries do it" to explain how costs will actually be managed, then they'll deserve serious consideration.
"Medicaid for everyone!"
These are the standard responses to critics of Obamacare. Unfortunately, they do nothing to address the fact that by any objective measure -- versus how well it did or didn't pay for any individual's health care expense -- our current Medicaid system has unsustainable costs and poor outcomes.
Taking the current Medicaid model and extending it to "everyone" would be a disaster for the country, which is why *wanting* single payer is not germaine to anything except wishful thinking.
Wanting something and the ability to make it actually materialize are very different things. When single payer proponents can do better than "cutting out the insurer" and/or "other countries do it" to explain how costs will actually be managed, then they'll deserve serious consideration.
4
All studies about single payer have shown that in order to install it in the US, every citizen will have to pay more taxes, so that's how you pay for it. No miracles here.
At the same time, they also show that what each citizen will pay in additional taxes, will be much lower, in general, than what you currently pay in premiums and deductibles.
And THAT is because you eliminate the "for profit" part of the current system, you see?
Just read no matter what article written by Paul Krugman on this website and you'll find all the links to the relevant studies.
Conclusion: yes, it deserves serious consideration, especially now that the GOP is no longer interested in America's health care and only in using the government in order to cut taxes for the wealthiest Americans, even if that means destroying the health care of 22 million Americans and doing almost nothing about the debt and deficit.
At the same time, they also show that what each citizen will pay in additional taxes, will be much lower, in general, than what you currently pay in premiums and deductibles.
And THAT is because you eliminate the "for profit" part of the current system, you see?
Just read no matter what article written by Paul Krugman on this website and you'll find all the links to the relevant studies.
Conclusion: yes, it deserves serious consideration, especially now that the GOP is no longer interested in America's health care and only in using the government in order to cut taxes for the wealthiest Americans, even if that means destroying the health care of 22 million Americans and doing almost nothing about the debt and deficit.
10
You cite no facts to back up your claims of "unsustainable" and "would be a disaster." Discussions might be more productive if there were some data. That said, the US is not going broke. We spend plenty of money on plenty of things like new military equipment and paying contractors exorbitant fees for things an employee could do. It is all a matter of priorities. Money is not the issue. If other countries can do it successfully then why can't we? We're not so special or unique other than the amount we spend on wars and military.
In addition, actual costs will go down with universal care both for individuals (even if there is a tax increase, it will be less than the cost of premiums) and also for healthcare itself since that middle man will be cut out and if the profit-margin/mark up for hospitals and pharma as big business were to be limited as it should be.
The question is a matter of "will" -- and it appears much of the country is leaning in this direction now. Then there is a way.
In addition, actual costs will go down with universal care both for individuals (even if there is a tax increase, it will be less than the cost of premiums) and also for healthcare itself since that middle man will be cut out and if the profit-margin/mark up for hospitals and pharma as big business were to be limited as it should be.
The question is a matter of "will" -- and it appears much of the country is leaning in this direction now. Then there is a way.
8
AACNY,
You have uncovered the real reason the Democrats aren't speaking up for single-payer. They really don't want those donations from insurance companies, drug manufacturers & investment bankers to dry up.
The entire center-right consortium of Obama-Clinton-NYT are happy to put off 'serious consideration' as long as Trumpf serves to make the status quo seem liberal by contrast.
You have uncovered the real reason the Democrats aren't speaking up for single-payer. They really don't want those donations from insurance companies, drug manufacturers & investment bankers to dry up.
The entire center-right consortium of Obama-Clinton-NYT are happy to put off 'serious consideration' as long as Trumpf serves to make the status quo seem liberal by contrast.
3
And I still can't have my primary care physician since 1997 recognized as an official primary care physician.
I'd be a lot more optimistic about Obamacare if I hadn't seen the record of donations by insurance companies to senators.
I'd be a lot more optimistic about Obamacare if I hadn't seen the record of donations by insurance companies to senators.
7
Which senators are those? GOP mostly. Why on earth would you think that isn't the case with any new policy or law? Worse. So it seems you think it's better to reinvent the wheel and make it come out square than it is to smooth out the wheel we already have. Hmmm.
1
No where in your editorial is there any reference to the republicans sabotaging the ACA. By no longer requiring the healthy younger adults to buy insurance, the only ones requesting coverage are the less-healthy, older individuals and those with pre-existing conditions. Is it a wonder it's failing on it's own weight? It is time for Medicare for all!
10
"By no longer requiring the healthy younger adults to buy insurance, the only ones requesting coverage are the less-healthy, older individuals and those with pre-existing conditions."
The young, healthy population opted to pay the fine, which kept the insurance companies from making enough to cover the care for the older, less-healthy individuals. That is wahy several health care companies withdrew from the so-called "marketplaces" - they were losing money. Only government works at a loss on a continuing basis. So, yes, the ACA is collapsing, despite what the Editorial Board would lead you to believe.
The young, healthy population opted to pay the fine, which kept the insurance companies from making enough to cover the care for the older, less-healthy individuals. That is wahy several health care companies withdrew from the so-called "marketplaces" - they were losing money. Only government works at a loss on a continuing basis. So, yes, the ACA is collapsing, despite what the Editorial Board would lead you to believe.
For the ignorant, who believe that only large amounts of money and reduced costs will save them, having someone else pay all the costs of health care is the only solution.
They are all chasing a Will of the Wisp.
They are all chasing a Will of the Wisp.
3
Actually, they may find out, when they catch it, that they were chasing a Will of the Wasp...
As they get stung by the staggering rises in taxes and "fees" to pay for things.
As they get stung by the staggering rises in taxes and "fees" to pay for things.
1
Kate De Braose, have you ever had employer-sponsored health insurance? Then the taxpayer was subsidizing your insurance. That's something that's been going on since the 1940s, and it hardly seems will o the wisp.
Most of us just aren't aware of how we benefit from taxpayer subsidies.
Most of us just aren't aware of how we benefit from taxpayer subsidies.
The 71% of voters who want the republicans in congress to work with democrats to fix the ACA is just wishful thinking.
The best option for every voter is to vote out their republican in congress and replace him (for the most part, him) with a democrat.
Then repeal will be off the table and the ACA will get fixed.
The best option for every voter is to vote out their republican in congress and replace him (for the most part, him) with a democrat.
Then repeal will be off the table and the ACA will get fixed.
8
Am I being churlish for reminding you that The Voter has turned out more than 900 liberals and Democrats from office in the past eight years?
The Voters need to finish the job by voting another 900 liberals and Democrats from political positions in the state and federal governments.
THEN, some sanity and fiscal responsibility may return to our governance.
The Voters need to finish the job by voting another 900 liberals and Democrats from political positions in the state and federal governments.
THEN, some sanity and fiscal responsibility may return to our governance.
1
With control of all three branches the GOP still can't get anything done on their wish list, that's just incompetence not a mandate for more.
Your premise, Mr. Roebuck, that the GOP can't get anything done is belied by the kicking and screaming that we see daily here in the NY Times editorials and comments and elsewere in the media.
The Trump administration and the GOP have done any number of things that have you on the left apoplectic. And we are only a short seven months into Trump's first term..
It would appear that you are either willfully ignorant of what is transpiring or doing the engaging in the political hackery that we see here on a daily basis...
The two, by the way, are not mutually exclusive.
The Trump administration and the GOP have done any number of things that have you on the left apoplectic. And we are only a short seven months into Trump's first term..
It would appear that you are either willfully ignorant of what is transpiring or doing the engaging in the political hackery that we see here on a daily basis...
The two, by the way, are not mutually exclusive.
1
It is incredible to watch Republicans try to destroy what's working in healthcare by replacing it with changes opposed by just about everyone in the healthcare delivery system in the U.S. Average citizens who thinks Republicans have their best healthcare interests in mind are deceived.
13
Deceived, yes, but surely delusional, too.
So single payer advocates, can you tell me, honestly and with a straight face, that we will pay the same premium (as a tax instead) and we will somehow all be covered to the same standard we are now, especially once the government steps into the picture?
I rather think that, yes we will all have coverage for the essentials but that coverage will be much diminished than what the average joe has today. I rather think we will pay more in taxes for Medicare and in addition those that can will need to fork out more on top for some kind of private top up coverage in order to skip the line to get treatment ahead of those having to slum it on the Medicare for all government waiting lists.
Careful what you wish for.
I rather think that, yes we will all have coverage for the essentials but that coverage will be much diminished than what the average joe has today. I rather think we will pay more in taxes for Medicare and in addition those that can will need to fork out more on top for some kind of private top up coverage in order to skip the line to get treatment ahead of those having to slum it on the Medicare for all government waiting lists.
Careful what you wish for.
6
Hjb, HR676 is a serious bill that was introduced in 2003 and reintroduced every year since. It is a simple 70 page bill that gives an improved version of Medicare to every man, woman & child in the US. It currently has 113 cosponsors.
There is a study of its savings in a study by Gerald Friedman, a professor of economics at the U of MA done in 2013. Friedman says his analysis shows it would save an estimated $592 billion in 2014. That would be more than enough to cover all 44 million people the government estimates will be uninsured in that year & to upgrade benefits for everyone else. The savings would come from slashing the administrative waste associated with today’s private health insurance industry ($476 billion) and using the new, public system’s bargaining muscle to negotiate pharmaceutical drug prices down to European levels ($116 billion). The long term saving would be much more because of the funding of preventative medicine & the existence of a single entity to gather data. analyze it, and make recommendation & regulations.
Friedman’s findings are consistent with other research showing large savings from a single-payer plan. Single-payer fiscal studies by other economists, such as Kenneth E. Thorpe (2005), have arrived at similar conclusions, as have studies conducted by the CBO & the GAO in the early 1990s. Other studies have documented the administrative efficiency & other benefits of Canada’s single-payer system in comparison with the current U.S. system.
There is a study of its savings in a study by Gerald Friedman, a professor of economics at the U of MA done in 2013. Friedman says his analysis shows it would save an estimated $592 billion in 2014. That would be more than enough to cover all 44 million people the government estimates will be uninsured in that year & to upgrade benefits for everyone else. The savings would come from slashing the administrative waste associated with today’s private health insurance industry ($476 billion) and using the new, public system’s bargaining muscle to negotiate pharmaceutical drug prices down to European levels ($116 billion). The long term saving would be much more because of the funding of preventative medicine & the existence of a single entity to gather data. analyze it, and make recommendation & regulations.
Friedman’s findings are consistent with other research showing large savings from a single-payer plan. Single-payer fiscal studies by other economists, such as Kenneth E. Thorpe (2005), have arrived at similar conclusions, as have studies conducted by the CBO & the GAO in the early 1990s. Other studies have documented the administrative efficiency & other benefits of Canada’s single-payer system in comparison with the current U.S. system.
5
Speaking as someone who has been on Medicare for 8 years, I have never had better coverage or higher quality medical services, and the cost is a fraction of what I used to pay. Many countries with single-payer programs provide higher quality heath care at lower per capita prices than the U.S. does.
6
Len:
No doubt there are significant savings to be had from cutting "administrative" expenses. What I have yet to see is how a US single payer system will address American attitudes -- especially, (a) those who don't want to pay and (b) those who insist that everything be covered. A system designed for them -- and that's what demagoguing politicians design, after all -- would be a nightmare scenario.
In reality, other countries do ration in some form. The NIH in England wanted to delay joint replacements for obese and smoking patients. Canada places annual caps on procedures. We have a Medicaid population that visits ER's because it is more convenient. Do you think there is this kind of abuse in Germany?
On paper, the argument for single payer can quite easily be made, but when you factor in the habits of Americans and the behavior of politicians -- both in pandering and in taking bribes from Big Pharma, etc. -- it becomes a very different "model."
No doubt there are significant savings to be had from cutting "administrative" expenses. What I have yet to see is how a US single payer system will address American attitudes -- especially, (a) those who don't want to pay and (b) those who insist that everything be covered. A system designed for them -- and that's what demagoguing politicians design, after all -- would be a nightmare scenario.
In reality, other countries do ration in some form. The NIH in England wanted to delay joint replacements for obese and smoking patients. Canada places annual caps on procedures. We have a Medicaid population that visits ER's because it is more convenient. Do you think there is this kind of abuse in Germany?
On paper, the argument for single payer can quite easily be made, but when you factor in the habits of Americans and the behavior of politicians -- both in pandering and in taking bribes from Big Pharma, etc. -- it becomes a very different "model."
2
Obamacare may or may not be collapsing, but we can certainly do much better.
Medicare for everyone.
Medicare for everyone.
8
It's the greatest tragedy that we don't have a Congress that can work together to fix this law. Increase the penalties/incentives to get the young and healthy to buy insurance, make the markets more vibrant, reform Medicare, focus on all of the good ideas for decreasing medical costs that were floated at the time the ACA was passed.
6
Obamacare is collapsing because it failed to control the exorbitant costs of medical tests and procedures. It was a gift to the health care and insurance industries, to be paid for by working middle class Americans who don't qualify for taxpayer subsidies. Eventually we will have to address the central problem of costs.
7
Medicare does negotiate costs of what it pays for different tests and procedures, like most insurance companies.
It's not collapsing. Didn't you read the article?
1
Obamacare is NOT collapsing but you are exactly right when you cite the health care and insurance industries as being the beneficiaries of untold, undeserved wealth coming out of the pockets of those who can least afford to support a parasitic health system. The central problem to which you refer -which includes costs - can be solved by single payer insurance (Medicare for all).
What good is competition among insurers if they all rely on the same static pool of providers? Complaints of high premiums are the most voiced by consumers. But what mechanism exists that would lower those high costs? We all agree or assume doctors in the U.S. are over worked. So why hasn't the market and free market forces been fixing that problem by increasing the pipeline capacity of medical schools and teaching hospitals so we would have more doctors per capita?
Doesn't common sense and free market advocacy pretty much say that if you increase the number of doctors that availability and costs will go down?
Doesn't common sense and free market advocacy pretty much say that if you increase the number of doctors that availability and costs will go down?
2
No, the law of supply and demand fails for health care. The areas in the US with the greatest density of physicians are the most expensive. Here is what the main people who supply the data say:
From http://www.dartmouthatlas.org/keyissues/issue.aspx?con=2940
"Increasing the number of physicians will make our health care system worse, not better. First, unfettered growth is likely to exacerbate regional inequities in supply and spending; our research has shown that physicians generally do not choose to practice where the need is greatest. Second, expansion of graduate medical education would most likely further undermine primary care and reinforce trends toward a fragmented, specialist-oriented health care system. Current reimbursement systems strongly favor procedure-oriented specialties, and training programs would almost certainly respond to these incentives. Third, workforce expansion will be expensive. If outcomes and patients' perception of access improved as supply increased, then we could debate whether an expansion of training offers better value than investments in preventive care, disease management, or broader insurance coverage, which have known benefits. Instead, the costs of expansion will limit the resources available for necessary reform efforts without any evidence-based promise of a benefit."
From http://www.dartmouthatlas.org/keyissues/issue.aspx?con=2940
"Increasing the number of physicians will make our health care system worse, not better. First, unfettered growth is likely to exacerbate regional inequities in supply and spending; our research has shown that physicians generally do not choose to practice where the need is greatest. Second, expansion of graduate medical education would most likely further undermine primary care and reinforce trends toward a fragmented, specialist-oriented health care system. Current reimbursement systems strongly favor procedure-oriented specialties, and training programs would almost certainly respond to these incentives. Third, workforce expansion will be expensive. If outcomes and patients' perception of access improved as supply increased, then we could debate whether an expansion of training offers better value than investments in preventive care, disease management, or broader insurance coverage, which have known benefits. Instead, the costs of expansion will limit the resources available for necessary reform efforts without any evidence-based promise of a benefit."
Very interesting. But what would happen if the system contractually subsidizes the education component (as the military does) where by the newly minted doctors are required to serve in areas plagued by doctor shortages, at predetermined salaries and set period of time as repayment for their education? Their initial stints could also be calibrated to swell the ranks of general practitioners or primary care physicians. If they were to work in county, non profit, or VA facilities there might also be some component of indemnification or lessening the malpractice insurance price tag.
1
" But Mr. McConnell and his party have become so blinded by their rage against Obamacare that they are losing sight of what ought to be their goal: safeguarding the health of their constituents." In a nut shell this is what the Republicans are doing. They are consistent with what Senator McConnell have been saying to every Obama proposal, 'just say no' as they became party of 'no' for every proposal that came from President Obama; I am convinced it was not because Obama was a Democrat but for other reasons.
In President Trump they have found another supporter of the same ideology, just examine the policies he is putting forward, starting with Muslim Ban, Immigration ban, and now changes in legal immigration where he wants to limit it to somehow return to the so called glory days of America when even slavery was legal and women could not vote, even white ones.
There are now documented evidence that ACA has put brakes on the inflationary pressures of Health Care costs. It is providing much needed preventive care to millions more and is allowing people to change jobs without consideration of losing one’s healthcare coverage.
All its improvement in accessibility and quality of care ACA is the first step in its drive towards perfection, the republicans should take it to the next level which is Universal healthcare as a basic Human right for all. Make it Medicare/Medicaid for all Senator McConnell.
In President Trump they have found another supporter of the same ideology, just examine the policies he is putting forward, starting with Muslim Ban, Immigration ban, and now changes in legal immigration where he wants to limit it to somehow return to the so called glory days of America when even slavery was legal and women could not vote, even white ones.
There are now documented evidence that ACA has put brakes on the inflationary pressures of Health Care costs. It is providing much needed preventive care to millions more and is allowing people to change jobs without consideration of losing one’s healthcare coverage.
All its improvement in accessibility and quality of care ACA is the first step in its drive towards perfection, the republicans should take it to the next level which is Universal healthcare as a basic Human right for all. Make it Medicare/Medicaid for all Senator McConnell.
19
Republican are blinded by their flawed ideology on this and most other issues.
They throw around the lies and rhetoric regarding the ACA with the same disregard for the truth that applies to most of what they say. Now we have the
biggest liar of all in the White House. The big orange nightmare seems to not even know when He's lying anymore. So, let me remind all my friends on the right of one simple truth. All insurance is a form of socialism. I know most of them don't know the difference between socialism and communism, but there it is. All insurance is a shared risk pool. It's time to expand the pool, single payer, Medicare for All!!!
They throw around the lies and rhetoric regarding the ACA with the same disregard for the truth that applies to most of what they say. Now we have the
biggest liar of all in the White House. The big orange nightmare seems to not even know when He's lying anymore. So, let me remind all my friends on the right of one simple truth. All insurance is a form of socialism. I know most of them don't know the difference between socialism and communism, but there it is. All insurance is a shared risk pool. It's time to expand the pool, single payer, Medicare for All!!!
22
GOP has always opposed social safety nets. 'Makes people lazy.'
11
All while writing one bill after the other into law that distorts the free market to the detriment of workers and employees and only benefiting the wealthy ...
Because if a law says that a CEO may keep 90% of his workers' profits for himself, and he then starts tweeting all day, he's not being lazy, the government simply doesn't have the right to tell him he has to work ...
THAT's "small government", for today's Republicans.
Because if a law says that a CEO may keep 90% of his workers' profits for himself, and he then starts tweeting all day, he's not being lazy, the government simply doesn't have the right to tell him he has to work ...
THAT's "small government", for today's Republicans.
8
The party of alternative facts led by a proven pathological liar, the "best" of their 17 possible candidates. What could go wrong! The GOP is unfit to govern.
26
YES, Obamacare is collapsing. There are one or no choice in states. And this Medicare for all chants just shoes people do not know/understand healthcare as it is unaffordable. Actually so $ one would no longer know the U.S. economy.
3
No.
Read Krugman:
"To understand what’s happened with the A.C.A. so far, you need to realize that as written (and interpreted by the Supreme Court), the law’s functioning depends a lot on cooperation from state governments. And where states have in fact cooperated, expanding Medicaid, operating their own insurance exchanges, and promoting both enrollment and competition among insurers, it has worked pretty darn well.
"Compare, for example, the experience of Kentucky and its neighbor Tennessee. In 2013, before full implementation of the A.C.A., Tennessee had slightly fewer uninsured, 13 percent versus 14 percent. But by 2015 Kentucky, which implemented the law in full, had cut its uninsured rate to just 6 percent, while Tennessee was at 11.
"Or consider the problem of counties with only one (or no) insurer, meaning no competition. As one recent study points out, this is almost entirely a red-state problem. In states with G.O.P. governors, 21 percent of the population lives in such counties; in Democratic-governor states, less than 2 percent."
Read Krugman:
"To understand what’s happened with the A.C.A. so far, you need to realize that as written (and interpreted by the Supreme Court), the law’s functioning depends a lot on cooperation from state governments. And where states have in fact cooperated, expanding Medicaid, operating their own insurance exchanges, and promoting both enrollment and competition among insurers, it has worked pretty darn well.
"Compare, for example, the experience of Kentucky and its neighbor Tennessee. In 2013, before full implementation of the A.C.A., Tennessee had slightly fewer uninsured, 13 percent versus 14 percent. But by 2015 Kentucky, which implemented the law in full, had cut its uninsured rate to just 6 percent, while Tennessee was at 11.
"Or consider the problem of counties with only one (or no) insurer, meaning no competition. As one recent study points out, this is almost entirely a red-state problem. In states with G.O.P. governors, 21 percent of the population lives in such counties; in Democratic-governor states, less than 2 percent."
2
Well, to Republican thinking, anyone but the top 5% of wealthy people are the moocher class. Lets not forget that Mr. Ryan acts like a happy spaniel when thinking about Ayn Rand, Mr. McConnell is quietly running the country with his ugly smirk, and the President is a clueless man-child who can't read a pamphlet.
10
The various concoctions offered up as health care reform by the Republican senatorial cabal are best described as a mean spirited shell game. Contrast what is proposed with the fact that they as members of Congress have the best health care that other peoples money can buy. Somewhere Machiavelli is grinning like a jack'o lantern.
7
Obamacare is not collapsing, imploding of exploding
But the Trump presidency is
But the Trump presidency is
10
Mitch McConnell has a tough night. Tossing and turning. What's this ? Does his conscience suddenly bother him ? No he's having a nightmare. He's a poor man in his own state, 62, and newly diagnosed with a chronic illness. "I'm sorry his doc tells him, your insurance won't cover the chemo. And the meds are $150 k per year "
Mitch wakes up screaming then wipes the sweat off his deeply furrowed brow. " Wow what a nightmare " , he mumbles to his wife. Describing the dream, he's still trembling from the feeling of total helplessness. His wife murmers "Funny dream. You have and always will have the best insurance this country can offer. "
Mitch breathes a huge sigh of relief, rolls over, and goes back to sleep with a smile on his face
Mitch wakes up screaming then wipes the sweat off his deeply furrowed brow. " Wow what a nightmare " , he mumbles to his wife. Describing the dream, he's still trembling from the feeling of total helplessness. His wife murmers "Funny dream. You have and always will have the best insurance this country can offer. "
Mitch breathes a huge sigh of relief, rolls over, and goes back to sleep with a smile on his face
4
If you think Obama care is not collapsing, then please send me your address I will forward to you:
1) My escalating insurance premiums
2) My escalating copays
3) My escalating deductibles
4) Bills from doctors for perfectly reasonable procedure that the insurance company no longer pays for
5) My demand for compensation due to the fact that my daughter's surgery was a failure, because my suregeon of choice would not work with the insurance I was forced to switch to
Would you also like to pay for the increased debt and taxes that people are forced to pay to fund this garbage? Or do you want to continue to bloviate using other people's money?
1) My escalating insurance premiums
2) My escalating copays
3) My escalating deductibles
4) Bills from doctors for perfectly reasonable procedure that the insurance company no longer pays for
5) My demand for compensation due to the fact that my daughter's surgery was a failure, because my suregeon of choice would not work with the insurance I was forced to switch to
Would you also like to pay for the increased debt and taxes that people are forced to pay to fund this garbage? Or do you want to continue to bloviate using other people's money?
9
so you chose the wrong plan, hate having to pay your own way, and expect to have unbridled choice on which insurances a doctor will take, and yet you think that means the ACA is collapsing... notice all the factual sentences revolve around the word "you" which is a clear sign the problem is YOU and your expectations.
All of these things could've been mitigated or limited if the subsidies and support promised to the insurance companies hadn't been defunded by Marco Rubio. I recall Republicans blocking and obstructing this law since even before it became law. I would surmise most of the problems with it are because of the parts the Republicans inserted when Congress was drafting it.
Doesn't your job supply health insurance?
Doesn't your job supply health insurance?
You hit it right on the head: "4) Bills from doctors for perfectly reasonable procedure that the insurance company no longer pays for"
Don't you see it's the profit-driven insurance industry that is the prime motivator of higher cost, fewer services and screw you so we can make more money? It is not Obamacare.
As you clearly describe, it's the insurance industry middlemen who in fact run the "death panels" that denied the care to which you rightly believed were entitled - not Obamacare.
Please,take this as a lesson and help campaign for a Medicare or Medicare-like system that cuts out the rapacious health care middlemen in order to deliver to you and your family the health care you expect and deserve.
Sure, your taxes will go up but the increase will pay for and replace the ridiculous insurance premiums and unrealistic deductibles you now have to account for. You will be way ahead in the end - financially and mentally. Think about it.
Don't you see it's the profit-driven insurance industry that is the prime motivator of higher cost, fewer services and screw you so we can make more money? It is not Obamacare.
As you clearly describe, it's the insurance industry middlemen who in fact run the "death panels" that denied the care to which you rightly believed were entitled - not Obamacare.
Please,take this as a lesson and help campaign for a Medicare or Medicare-like system that cuts out the rapacious health care middlemen in order to deliver to you and your family the health care you expect and deserve.
Sure, your taxes will go up but the increase will pay for and replace the ridiculous insurance premiums and unrealistic deductibles you now have to account for. You will be way ahead in the end - financially and mentally. Think about it.
Warren Buffet a democrat said the week after Obamacare was passed, "I would not have done it that way" (more money going out than coming in)
3
Sunil, there have been 6 significant periods in US history when the federal government had more money coming in than going out. All were ended by one of our 6 terrible depression. Here are the historical facts:
The federal government has balanced the budget, eliminated deficits, for more than four years in just six periods since 1776, bringing in enough revenue to cover all of its spending during 1817-21, 1823-36, 1852-57, 1867-73, 1880-93, and 1920-30. The debt was paid down 29%. 100%, 59%, 27%, 57%, and 38% respectively. A depression began in 1819, 1837, 1857, 1873, 1893 and 1929.
The federal government has balanced the budget, eliminated deficits, for more than four years in just six periods since 1776, bringing in enough revenue to cover all of its spending during 1817-21, 1823-36, 1852-57, 1867-73, 1880-93, and 1920-30. The debt was paid down 29%. 100%, 59%, 27%, 57%, and 38% respectively. A depression began in 1819, 1837, 1857, 1873, 1893 and 1929.
Photo caption in article:
"A supporter of the Affordable Care Act demonstrating in Chicago in June"
Sign she is holding:
"SAVE THE ACA, THEN MAKE IT BETTER. MEDICARE FOR ALL."
Doesn't look like a full throated support for the failing ACA, editorial board
"A supporter of the Affordable Care Act demonstrating in Chicago in June"
Sign she is holding:
"SAVE THE ACA, THEN MAKE IT BETTER. MEDICARE FOR ALL."
Doesn't look like a full throated support for the failing ACA, editorial board
4
Warren Buffett says healthcare is the tapeworm of American business, sucking at its very life. Healthcare has been the "third rail" of American politics for decades, certainly since the Clinton era. It amazes how this crop of political animals can look history in the eye, and deny it. So twisted by ideology and corruption of the essence of their responsibilities under the Constitution, they trudge on dragging the American people backward into the abyss.
1
The ACA was poorly conceived, poorly rolled out and continues to provide poor coverage which in many states now means one provider with annual premium increases at 70% or more. Of course the editors of the NYT's have no idea what it is actually like to be on the ACA, so please put away the DNC talking points and perhaps do a better job of research and provide other options that are not single payer.
7
states are responsible for the condition of the exchanges in their boundaries and in republican states the leaders have done all they can to make the exchanges fail....so who is to blame?
Please mention how Obamcare provides unlimited reimbursement for rehab and substance abuse treatment.
Around me in Florida there are hundreds of 'sober houses' established by local humanitarians treating thousands of substance abusers.
Thanks to Obamacare, these young people are being quickly returned to a life of social contribution and philanthropy.
Around me in Florida there are hundreds of 'sober houses' established by local humanitarians treating thousands of substance abusers.
Thanks to Obamacare, these young people are being quickly returned to a life of social contribution and philanthropy.
7
While it may be true that 71% of Americans want Republicans to work with Democrats to improve the law, we must remember that the 23 percent that want to repeal, and maybe replace, the ACA, includes the enough of the top 0.1% of the population. Those well to do folks are exercising their "free speech," in the form of cash, and it is from that "free speech" that the Republicans get their marching orders.
3
Great to shed some light on this now but isn't this a little late in the game to explain why the ACA is working. This needed to be sold by Obama, the Dems, the NYT, the WP etc. years ago, or at least during the presidential campaign.
44
As I recall, it was. However, any reports of ACA's success were met with predictable partisanship from the right: socialized medicine; death panels; and on and on. They succeeded at making more noise and gaining more attention with innuendo than any reasonable discussion of ACA's successes and shortcomings did. The most shrill voices won the day with the general public.
It is late but not too late. Pathetic the way the Dems lacked the courage to stand behind Obamacare until now. Especially the way they ran away from it in 2014. Let's see if they have what it takes this time around.
"The A.C.A. is not perfect, but its problems are fixable." Republican have been rigorously trained to demonize the ACA and ignore its strengths while focusing exclusively on its weaknesses. This article points out those weaknesses very clearly and pointedly articulates the further work that needs to be done. It's about progress, not perfection. The ACA has saved lives and enabled millions of Americans to get access to healthcare they were previously unable to have. The weak points have been acknowledged many times over, and no one denies that more work needs to be done so that every American can get coverage. It will happen if Republicans let it and work with it constructively. But Republicans and the faithful opponents to all things Obama are trained and addicted to willfully, selectively and reflexively ignore the ACA's profound strengths and the fact that - through further refinement - it will bring healthcare to all Americans a lot faster than setting it on fire and bringing everyone back to zero.
6
Great Britain is every bit as diverse as the U.S. They have had not just a universal insurance program but "socialized medicine" since 1948. It has been updated, amended, improved, etc. over the years as any system has to be but no British politician is running for office promising to repeal the National Health Service.
This piece tries to gloss over the very real problems with ACA. The fact that the problems don't affect everyone doesn't make them less real. Fixing the problems is critical.
3
To those who support single payer, show me another country as diverse as the u.s, where it works. Truthfully, as long as a pregnant illegal alien can jump the rio grande and have a child who is a citizen, single payer will never happen. Fix that flaw in the constitution (which is unheard of in other countries), create a more cohesive society, and more social programs will become possible.
5
That would be true, IF the main cause of higher healthcare costs at a federal level would be providing Medicaid or Medicare to 11 million illegal aliens.
Already today, however (= without covering aliens), the US spends ten times as much per capita on healthcare than the other Western countries, including those with single payer.
Insuring 10 million more Americans means paying, overall, 3% more than what we do today. That's peanuts, compared to the fact ten caused by other reasons (a for profit insurance industry, few caps on drug prices, not enough healthy Americans who buy insurance in order to obtain lower premiums ...).
Cut out the middle man and as such the billions of waste, and EVEN if we would decide to cover illegal aliens (which today no political party proposes or supports, even not under single payer), and we'll end up spending less and getting more care ...
Already today, however (= without covering aliens), the US spends ten times as much per capita on healthcare than the other Western countries, including those with single payer.
Insuring 10 million more Americans means paying, overall, 3% more than what we do today. That's peanuts, compared to the fact ten caused by other reasons (a for profit insurance industry, few caps on drug prices, not enough healthy Americans who buy insurance in order to obtain lower premiums ...).
Cut out the middle man and as such the billions of waste, and EVEN if we would decide to cover illegal aliens (which today no political party proposes or supports, even not under single payer), and we'll end up spending less and getting more care ...
4
I'd like to see another country with single payer where its citizens use the emergency room for routine medical care because it's hours are more convenient and they cannot be legally turned away.
If you want to see how single payer would look in the US, just look at the Medicaid *expansion*, under which costs exceeded CBO estimates by 50% and fraud doubled.
Americans only like a system that covers everything and for which they don't have to pay. To create a single payer system that satisfies Americans would be the worst of both worlds. A system that covers everything without restrictions but for which they refuse to pay. Someone will wind up paying, and it won't be pretty.
If you want to see how single payer would look in the US, just look at the Medicaid *expansion*, under which costs exceeded CBO estimates by 50% and fraud doubled.
Americans only like a system that covers everything and for which they don't have to pay. To create a single payer system that satisfies Americans would be the worst of both worlds. A system that covers everything without restrictions but for which they refuse to pay. Someone will wind up paying, and it won't be pretty.
2
@ AACNY
1. I don't find any information source claiming that the Medicaid expansion cost 50% more than the CBO estimated. Could you please provide a link?
2. Why would Americans be such an ugly and bad people, compared to other Western populations? What makes you believe that they only want "a system that covers everything and for which they don't have to pay"?
Fact is, under single payer Americans would have to pay more taxes, but that would still be less, overall, than what they pay in premiums and deductibles today. And that's precisely what people supporting single payer want - and it's even compatible with your idea that people want to get more care and pay less ...
1. I don't find any information source claiming that the Medicaid expansion cost 50% more than the CBO estimated. Could you please provide a link?
2. Why would Americans be such an ugly and bad people, compared to other Western populations? What makes you believe that they only want "a system that covers everything and for which they don't have to pay"?
Fact is, under single payer Americans would have to pay more taxes, but that would still be less, overall, than what they pay in premiums and deductibles today. And that's precisely what people supporting single payer want - and it's even compatible with your idea that people want to get more care and pay less ...
Unfortunately, Obamacare is collapsing, imploding and exploding where it matters most -- in the Republican-controlled Congress. At this point, we can only hope that two senators will join Rand Paul to "kill the bill" scheduled to re-emerge from hiding today. If Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell, is unable to persuade Sens. Susan Collins (R-ME) and Dean Heller (R-NV) to support his latest version of his vampire Better Care Reconciliation Act perhaps it will finally have a stake driven through its cold, life-draining heart.
2
Why is the GOP at war against health.
5
Unfortunately, all that additional Medicaid spending didn't actually improve health outcomes. In fact, it's spending without an improvement in outcomes that they are against.
1
This article is just proof of the Republican mantra that if you repeat something often enough, whether it is the truth or a lie, a significant portion of the population will believe.
3
Just like Obama kept repeating: 'If you like your health care plan, you can keep it'.
1
Thus spoke Zarathustra: "The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those unable to fly" may be applicable to the myopic view of republican perverse disenfranchising of the poor, the sick and the elderly, in their new proposed bill for healthcare-less insurance. Since they have no viable ideas to help people, they insist in destroying whatever is of value, bombarding Obamacare in what it appears a racist move to erase Obama from the political map. What an outrage. These fraudsters have no business being in congress, as they have disgraced themselves in the eyes of justice, reason, common sense, and basic humanity. These hypocrites are trying to take away the very healthcare insurance they themselves take for granted. How low can they fly, being in Trump's swamp already?
2
Republican representatives must cease and desist in declaring Obamacare a disaster, a failure, imploding, melting down and whatnot. These are lies. Are we so used to the daily barrage of lies from the White House that we've become immune? There are problems with the ACA. Those problems can and should be corrected. The baby should not be thrown out with the bath water. The ACA should be fixed, improved upon. The foundation has been set. What the ACA needs is to be re-purposed. That is what was done to FDR's Social Security Act. Doesn't anyone know that Social Security's expansion and revision barely resembles FDR's initial program. It was tinkered with and improved upon through the decades. Let US do the same with the ACA. Stop these Republicans lies.
DD
Manhattan
DD
Manhattan
5
As with Social Security, now with Medicaid-healthcare, and soon to be with respect to Medicare, the Republican "big lie" propaganda machine is relentlessly chugging away.
Have Mr. McConnell and his party been blinded by Obamacare or the fact that Obama was president? In my own opinion, these people appear to be willing to sell the United States just to make up for the fact that Mr. Obama was president. Hence, Mr. Trump.
1
I keep getting this image in my mind when I picture a person getting health care in the USA. It's a woman in a gown sitting on the examining table in a doctor's office, her physician, and a guy in a suit with a briefcase. The guy in the suit is not needed and adds no value of any kind. But all of the fuss is about appeasing the guy in the suit.
2
The fiction that the ACA set up "death panels" was propagated by such Republican luminaries as Sarah Palin and her supporters. Yet, despite all the evidence presented refuting the fiction, Republicans---as a block---chose to recycle the fiction in a variety of ways, using a variety of different slogans to "catapult the propaganda" as Bush II called the tactic.
They've had seven years. They've taken 50-some votes to repeal the ACA. In all that time, Republicans have failed to design an alternative. They have even failed to produce an accurate list of the ACA's supposed shortcomings. Turns out, that a party proficient in propaganda catapulting is not necessarily good at governing.
They've had seven years. They've taken 50-some votes to repeal the ACA. In all that time, Republicans have failed to design an alternative. They have even failed to produce an accurate list of the ACA's supposed shortcomings. Turns out, that a party proficient in propaganda catapulting is not necessarily good at governing.
2
Agreed.
But I fear that by hook or crook the GOP will get its bill to pass.
Mcconnell is investing an awful lot of capital into something where he is not going to win.
He must see some path to victory.
But I fear that by hook or crook the GOP will get its bill to pass.
Mcconnell is investing an awful lot of capital into something where he is not going to win.
He must see some path to victory.
1
There's one more nagging lie, that this column doesn't deal with. I suppose it's too big for one column. But it really is the basic topic.
The column says that Republicans are trying "to gather the votes for repeal of major provisions of the law." But it's not really even about the ACA at all.
The entire repeal idea is a Frank Luntz-ian effort ... to gather votes, any votes, for the GOP's candidates. The GOP will use ANY words, to provoke the public to vote for GOP candidates. Remember that, according to the GOP, "Obamacare" was already a "failed" law, before the ink was even dry. And the legislation ... clearly legal, just like reconciliation bills often used by George W. Bush ... was obviously an effort to "ram" "cram" "slam" "jam" this horrible law down our throats.
The GOP has learned to perfectly execute Frank Luntz's technique of associating negative-sounding words with their opposition. (The late 1990s GOP memo pushing Luntz's technique is really chilling.) But the GOP has, in the process, reduced our government to an endless, impotent mud-slinging match. Thanks, Frank, and thanks GOP.
The column says that Republicans are trying "to gather the votes for repeal of major provisions of the law." But it's not really even about the ACA at all.
The entire repeal idea is a Frank Luntz-ian effort ... to gather votes, any votes, for the GOP's candidates. The GOP will use ANY words, to provoke the public to vote for GOP candidates. Remember that, according to the GOP, "Obamacare" was already a "failed" law, before the ink was even dry. And the legislation ... clearly legal, just like reconciliation bills often used by George W. Bush ... was obviously an effort to "ram" "cram" "slam" "jam" this horrible law down our throats.
The GOP has learned to perfectly execute Frank Luntz's technique of associating negative-sounding words with their opposition. (The late 1990s GOP memo pushing Luntz's technique is really chilling.) But the GOP has, in the process, reduced our government to an endless, impotent mud-slinging match. Thanks, Frank, and thanks GOP.
2
The overriding philosophical questions of our age...
-Is America getting fatter or the rest of the world thinner?
-If an Antarctic glacier calves an iceberg the size of Delaware but no Republican saw it did it happen?
-If the Repeal of Obamacare results in a Senate alternative that covers tens of millions fewer people--mostly poor and middle class causing widespread suffering and premature death for tens of thousands, none of whom are wealthy Republicans benefit from GoP tax cutting is it still a superior health care reform?
Is God taking time off or has he turned his back on America in disgust?
-Is America getting fatter or the rest of the world thinner?
-If an Antarctic glacier calves an iceberg the size of Delaware but no Republican saw it did it happen?
-If the Repeal of Obamacare results in a Senate alternative that covers tens of millions fewer people--mostly poor and middle class causing widespread suffering and premature death for tens of thousands, none of whom are wealthy Republicans benefit from GoP tax cutting is it still a superior health care reform?
Is God taking time off or has he turned his back on America in disgust?
1
The Trump administration has been making sure that the ACA does not work by disseminating fake news and fear causing insurance companies (who's interests are questionable as well) to leave their communities. Trump simply wants to undo anything Obama did for political and selfish reasons, and the insurance companies are doing what they do best with respect to profits. The republicans are afraid to fix the ACA because then it would look like they sold out and Obama wins - what a bunch of weak, incompetent, narrow minded, selfish and arrogant government officials who have a nice life with great health insurance and salaries from our taxes.
2
In another newspaper a person from Texas was interviewed who basically said that Obamacare failed because he couldn't get Medicaid to pay for his knee replacements. This is an illustration of the confusion around health care payment in the USA. First, Texas set the rules for Medicaid in Texas, Obama offered more but the state declined. Basically, this guy was angry because Obama wasn't able to force the Republicans to give him health care. HIs response, vote for Republicans!!!
Second, Just how is health care supposed to be aid for? Either you pay yourself, maybe you run out of money and suffer for years with knee pain or getting your toes cut off because you couldn't afford diabetes medicine (and then sell you house to a the hospital), or we all pay, but somebody has to pay, some how.
I can understand how a person with a lot of money might feel that even a proportionate tax on income was unfair to them because they will never spend 5% 0r 10% of their income on health care, but for the rest of us this is a real possibility and for many a reality.
My own opinion is that the number of individuals against universal single payer health care are not many but that their use of megaphones and paid "choirs" makes them seem like a majority.
Second, Just how is health care supposed to be aid for? Either you pay yourself, maybe you run out of money and suffer for years with knee pain or getting your toes cut off because you couldn't afford diabetes medicine (and then sell you house to a the hospital), or we all pay, but somebody has to pay, some how.
I can understand how a person with a lot of money might feel that even a proportionate tax on income was unfair to them because they will never spend 5% 0r 10% of their income on health care, but for the rest of us this is a real possibility and for many a reality.
My own opinion is that the number of individuals against universal single payer health care are not many but that their use of megaphones and paid "choirs" makes them seem like a majority.
3
ObamaCare/ACa is one of the best policies our government has ever enacted it has helped Americans who otherwise would not have been able to get healthcare to do so. Insures do not want the ACA repealed and replaced with TrumpCare they know 23M Americans losing coverage and thousands more losing their jobs will cause a downward spiral. Likely causing a major recession which no tax break for the 1% can justify.
2
In light of his harsh & cruel actions perhaps Mitch McConnell should pay back all the money that was spent on his personal care during the polio epidemic...he seems to have forgotten who helped him survive, and then who educated him as well....the American taxpayers who also currently employ him and his wife and both receive great salaries w/ cushy benefits that we provide...he is supposed to serve us, his employers.
1
When you know that high-quality newspapers such as the NYT have to repeat some basic facts time and again, you know it's bad.
This article isn't saying anything new. Most of the studies it refers to exist for quite some time now, and together with other studies confirming the same conclusions, have been mentioned over and over again for years.
And yet, the GOP and their propaganda machines FN and BB still hope that nobody will notice ... and Ryan and McConnell seem to hope that especially the president himself won't find this out, as candidate Trump has ran on covering even more Americans than Obamacare, at even lower costs, and without any cuts to Medicaid.
"But Mr. McConnell and his party have become so blinded by their rage against Obamacare that they are losing sight of what ought to be their goal: safeguarding the health of their constituents."
I don't think so. They're not stupid. They know these studies, and knew them from the very beginning. It's just that as one Senator in the meanwhile already admitted, they never thought Trump would win and repeal and replace would become a real option. So they deliberately misled the GOP base about Obamacare month after month, year after year, for merely political reasons.
So now they have to repeal a bill they never wanted to repeal in the first place, and replace it with something better whereas the rhetoric that they've used for seven years already makes every real improvement look like Obamacare so is political suicide.
This article isn't saying anything new. Most of the studies it refers to exist for quite some time now, and together with other studies confirming the same conclusions, have been mentioned over and over again for years.
And yet, the GOP and their propaganda machines FN and BB still hope that nobody will notice ... and Ryan and McConnell seem to hope that especially the president himself won't find this out, as candidate Trump has ran on covering even more Americans than Obamacare, at even lower costs, and without any cuts to Medicaid.
"But Mr. McConnell and his party have become so blinded by their rage against Obamacare that they are losing sight of what ought to be their goal: safeguarding the health of their constituents."
I don't think so. They're not stupid. They know these studies, and knew them from the very beginning. It's just that as one Senator in the meanwhile already admitted, they never thought Trump would win and repeal and replace would become a real option. So they deliberately misled the GOP base about Obamacare month after month, year after year, for merely political reasons.
So now they have to repeal a bill they never wanted to repeal in the first place, and replace it with something better whereas the rhetoric that they've used for seven years already makes every real improvement look like Obamacare so is political suicide.
How can Repubs be se adamantly opposed when it was their ideas that formed the basis for this? Cognitive dissonance and the belief that if they don't pass (other party legislates) it it is never a good idea. Very unpatriotic indeed!
Combine absolute hatred for a black President ( how dare he! ) unfettered greed, an " uneducated " base, and the result is chaos. The willful ignorance is strong, and impossible to overcome. Let them enjoy what they vote for. I'm done, I'm finally out of compassion. Seriously.
4
The ACA, ("ObamaCare"), stinks.
The Republican plan stinks.
Here is MikeCare, it almost doesn't stink:
You know how the government pays to provide us with universal necessities like cops, education, libraries, road construction and repair, fire departments, snow removal, defense, garbage removal and the like? That's what we need in regard to medical care to make sure that everyone in the country, regardless of wealth or income, is covered. Just like with the other services it should be paid for using the taxes which we pay.
Go to whatever doctor you want, you pay a deductible to discourage frivolous medical visits, and the medical providers get paid according to a reasonable government schedule that is tailored to region. Medical providers who do not want to accept what the government is paying can do so by posting a notice in their offices to that effect. You either pay the difference or go elsewhere.
The government funds this. Since the government does not know how to run an insurance company it contracts it out to insurance companies who will run it for the government. Just like with FEMA and flood insurance.
And that's the end of it. Welcome to the 21st Century!
If it makes the prez feel any better we can call it "Trumpcare".
Representatives, get this through your heads, THIS is what We the People want. Anything less than this is no good, antiquated and criminal. We need and expect better from our elected representatives who work for us and get paid by us.
The Republican plan stinks.
Here is MikeCare, it almost doesn't stink:
You know how the government pays to provide us with universal necessities like cops, education, libraries, road construction and repair, fire departments, snow removal, defense, garbage removal and the like? That's what we need in regard to medical care to make sure that everyone in the country, regardless of wealth or income, is covered. Just like with the other services it should be paid for using the taxes which we pay.
Go to whatever doctor you want, you pay a deductible to discourage frivolous medical visits, and the medical providers get paid according to a reasonable government schedule that is tailored to region. Medical providers who do not want to accept what the government is paying can do so by posting a notice in their offices to that effect. You either pay the difference or go elsewhere.
The government funds this. Since the government does not know how to run an insurance company it contracts it out to insurance companies who will run it for the government. Just like with FEMA and flood insurance.
And that's the end of it. Welcome to the 21st Century!
If it makes the prez feel any better we can call it "Trumpcare".
Representatives, get this through your heads, THIS is what We the People want. Anything less than this is no good, antiquated and criminal. We need and expect better from our elected representatives who work for us and get paid by us.
1
How about medical providers who do not want to accept what the government is paying put up a sign that says "out of business, license revoked."
The republicans have lied about the ACA since day one, so their failure here is welcome. How do we tolerate such bad government?
1
No one lied more than Obama when it comes to Obamacare. Of course, his colossal lies were called "misstatements", remember?
2
Your editorial is correct, and it is a crying shame we do not hear more from the Dems of Congress, that in fact the GOP does nothing but LIE about the ACA. The Dems need to call these monsters for what they are, mean, greedy, selfish, partisan hacks who put party, god, guns, before country. The GOP have become the poster child for Un-American corporate enablers.
2018 can not come soon enough to change this motley crew and get America up and running again.
2018 can not come soon enough to change this motley crew and get America up and running again.
TWO MOST IMPORTANT RESPONSIBILITIES OF ANY ELECTED GOVERNMENT... towards protecting the LIFE OF IT'S CITIZENS...
1. Prevent war
2. Healthcare
Any government that keeps it's citizens in perpetual uncertainty and in constant fear, is failing the TRUST RESPOSED ON IT BY THE PEOPLE !
1. Prevent war
2. Healthcare
Any government that keeps it's citizens in perpetual uncertainty and in constant fear, is failing the TRUST RESPOSED ON IT BY THE PEOPLE !
"But Mr. McConnell and his party have become so blinded by their rage against Obamacare..."
I think what you mean is that they have become so blinded by their rage against Obama. Erasing him from the history books and lining their own pockets. THAT is their agenda.
I think what you mean is that they have become so blinded by their rage against Obama. Erasing him from the history books and lining their own pockets. THAT is their agenda.
1
Since it was passed the GOP has sought not just to repeal the ACA, but to guarantee its failure through obstruction. They have played fast and loose with our lives and our well being for no better reason than they could not abide a black democrat in the White House.
It is way past time for the Republican Party to fold up its "Big Tent" and fade quietly into the night.
It is way past time for the Republican Party to fold up its "Big Tent" and fade quietly into the night.
My massage therapist told me she has an ACA silver plan that costs her $260 a month. She is self employed and had no insurance before ACA. She is 50 lives a very healthy life, but because of a car accident years ago, has a preexisting condition. Under Trumpcare she would have to pay $1,000+ a month to get the same coverage. If the ACA is repealed she will go with out insurance until she is 65. Meanwhile she is keeping a whole lot of seniors who are on medicare (her clients) healthy and walking without canes and braces.
114
It should be noted also that trained and licensed neuromuscular therapists are not covered by any health insurance plans I know of. My experience with massage therapists is that good ones can provide significant pain relief and promote healing of injuries without drugs. Covering their healthcare services should be a major response to the opioid epidemic.
A happily subsidized individual. It's the people paying full price who are protesting.
Under Trumpcare, those currently subsidizing other people would get a break. Those being subsidized would pay more. In other words, republicans would rebalance things a bit.
Under Trumpcare, those currently subsidizing other people would get a break. Those being subsidized would pay more. In other words, republicans would rebalance things a bit.
4
ACA needs improvement but our political system discourages bipartisan behavior. It's winner take all. Neither republicans r democrats have reason to cooperate.
It's their ego that got Republicans into trouble. They found themselves bested by Obama & the Dems who delivered finally our first attempt at national health care. If they could just accept the fact that Dems started the ball rolling on health care and give credit where it's due, but point out and attempt to fix the ACA's problems, and so then take credit for that everyone would be happy. But the Reps can't do that because they want total credit.
54
I have to respectfully disagree. The strongest and staunchest opponents to Obamacare in the GOP are folks that believe that healthcare is a responsibility, not a human right, and that we should never spend a dime of public money for healthcare, ESPECIALLY if rich folks are made to pay for it.
In fact, I suspect GOP members to attempt negative taxation of rich folks some day, sponsored by the rest of us. Hey, they are "job creators", shouldn't we be thankful?
In fact, I suspect GOP members to attempt negative taxation of rich folks some day, sponsored by the rest of us. Hey, they are "job creators", shouldn't we be thankful?
And all the money.
"It's their ego that got Republicans into trouble. They found themselves bested by Obama & the Dems who delivered finally our first attempt at national health care."
No. The Democrats knew that once the ACA was passed it would be impossible to get rid of - people love their entitlements too much.
No. The Democrats knew that once the ACA was passed it would be impossible to get rid of - people love their entitlements too much.
Medicaid is good for the economy.
States are wise who invest in Medicaid for their poor.
Healthier poor people can work, go to school, and avoid crime and addiction.
Medicaid dollars are spent in-state, usually employing health providers, such as nurses, or care givers. These are jobs that keep the money in the state, and that cannot be outsourced or automated.
Finally, Medicaid dollars spent by a State are matched 1 to 1 with Federal dollars --and the ACA Medicaid expansion is ALL federal dollars. This is like free money for the State's economy.
This is why the Red GOP states are so mad. They missed out on a really good deal, because they were so biased against their own poor and elderly and disabled people .
Plus, the ACA was elegantly funded by a minor bump in a tax rate that was already too low -- the capital gains tax -- only on the top 3 percent of the population who have over $250,000 in income and have capital gains income instead of wage income.
States are wise who invest in Medicaid for their poor.
Healthier poor people can work, go to school, and avoid crime and addiction.
Medicaid dollars are spent in-state, usually employing health providers, such as nurses, or care givers. These are jobs that keep the money in the state, and that cannot be outsourced or automated.
Finally, Medicaid dollars spent by a State are matched 1 to 1 with Federal dollars --and the ACA Medicaid expansion is ALL federal dollars. This is like free money for the State's economy.
This is why the Red GOP states are so mad. They missed out on a really good deal, because they were so biased against their own poor and elderly and disabled people .
Plus, the ACA was elegantly funded by a minor bump in a tax rate that was already too low -- the capital gains tax -- only on the top 3 percent of the population who have over $250,000 in income and have capital gains income instead of wage income.
This editorial ignores most of the facts and cites only the few facts that bolster its case. Obamacare is dying a slow death. It was front loaded in benefits and back loaded in the actual means to pay for it. This was done purposely to help sell the bill.
If I were the Republicans I would do nothing and just wait for Obamacare to die. By then, some hapless Democrat will be in office and will have to fix it or replace it. More taxes and less benefits = political suicide.
If I were the Republicans I would do nothing and just wait for Obamacare to die. By then, some hapless Democrat will be in office and will have to fix it or replace it. More taxes and less benefits = political suicide.
14
Your wish has been fulfilled. The Republicans are doing nothing. Long ago, the Republicans in charge of states like yours decided to do their best to make it fail. The Republican US senators helped kill a safety net to encourage insurers to offer contracts to those areas that have older and sicker people. Sadly, those folks tend to live in Red states and still vote against their own economic and other interests. They fear increased taxes when most people have never paid income tax. They conflate payroll tax with income tax. The fact is that we have the best medical care but the lowest overall tax rates in spite of the nonsense put out by the Republican leadership. I am with you, let the Republicans kill the ACA and then go away so the the adults can take over and do what is right.
1
....and the facts supporting your argument that were left out by the editorial are.....?
1
What you say is contrary to the reports cited in the article.
I'm a family practice physician in Iowa and it bugs me to read headlines like this. Obamacare may be succeeding at the insurance company level and the government level, but it's failing at the patient level. The individual marketplace is awful if you don't get subsidies, and even if you do many of the policies have very high deductibles.
If I see a patient in the office with a 7K deductible, I'm essentially seeing an uninsured patient. All it is is overpriced catastrophic insurance.
Many patients elect not to buy the insurance at all and just take the tax penalty (which is now waived I believe). You can't mandate people buy bad and expensive insurance.
The NYT speaks of easy fixes for this - well let's hear them. I see no easy fixes, just hard decisions that no one from the president on down seems able to make, and I include both parties in that.
If I see a patient in the office with a 7K deductible, I'm essentially seeing an uninsured patient. All it is is overpriced catastrophic insurance.
Many patients elect not to buy the insurance at all and just take the tax penalty (which is now waived I believe). You can't mandate people buy bad and expensive insurance.
The NYT speaks of easy fixes for this - well let's hear them. I see no easy fixes, just hard decisions that no one from the president on down seems able to make, and I include both parties in that.
10
"If I see a patient in the office with a 7K deductible, I'm essentially seeing an uninsured patient. All it is is overpriced catastrophic insurance."
The irony is that Obamacare produced a new kind of "junk" policy, not based on benefits but prohibitive costs.
The irony is that Obamacare produced a new kind of "junk" policy, not based on benefits but prohibitive costs.
5
This is exactly right. The ACA ended up mandating people buy the type of plan they had previously criticized.
2
Those high-deductible policies existed before the ACA, and would exist whether or not the ACA was passed. The difference is that they were true junk policies that didn't cover anything and that could be rescinded as soon as the participant got ill.
The ACA is a huge step forward, but it only begins to solve the problem. No one disputes that many people are underinsured. Now let's get down to solving that problem. The solution obviously doesn't lie in repealing the ACA, but building upon it. Let's provide a public option to people in underserved markets, and let's increase subsidies to middle-class families.
The ACA is a huge step forward, but it only begins to solve the problem. No one disputes that many people are underinsured. Now let's get down to solving that problem. The solution obviously doesn't lie in repealing the ACA, but building upon it. Let's provide a public option to people in underserved markets, and let's increase subsidies to middle-class families.
Whether it is the premiums paid by individuals who do not receive substantial subsidies or the taxpayer funds required for the expansion of Medicaid, the main controversy surrounding the ACA relates to the high cost of healthcare. Despite the rancor from each political party, these are legitimate concerns as the U.S. pays double the per capita cost for healthcare compared to other developed countries. The solutions advocated by Democrats and Republicans amount to nothing more than cost shifting and do not alter the high cost of healthcare. Until we attack the underlying problem of obscene healthcare costs, both political parties will continue to engage in an act of musical chairs while U.S. taxpayers, citizens and the US economy bear the cost of a dysfunctional healthcare system.
4
I still don't understand why in articles about the individual insurance market under the ACA, no mention is ever made about what was happening in the individual market BEFORE the ACA was passed. My husband became a consultant and we entered the individual market. We bought a policy through Blue Cross that had a $3500 deductible for each of us and a cap of $1m. It cost about $450 for two months' coverage. Fast forward a few years and Blue Cross is bought by Anthem and my husband had been diagnosed with high blood pressure that was completely controllable by medication. We had to get our doctor to sign an affidavit that basically swore that my husband's blood pressure was and would continue to be controlled by drugs. Because now he had a pre-existing condition. Our deductible remained the same (which we never fulfilled) as well as the cap but by the time we were eligible for Medicare our premiums had increased to over $1900 for two months. And btw, Anthem had proposed a 40% increase that year! And we were the lucky ones. We were healthy and we could afford the premiums. There were thousands of people who couldn't find coverage at any cost because their pre-existing were more serious than high blood pressure like a cancer survivor, an HIV positive person etc. So when folks complain about the cost of ACA premiums I just shake my head.
18
I don't feel as though ACA or its proposed alternatives (are there any?) are actually addressing healthcare. This is all about insurance coverage. Who is looking at managing costs and improving delivery of care? Why are US patient outcomes below those of other developed countries', despite higher cost?
4
Actual numbers from someone I volunteer with. Man and wife in their 50's making less than 35K a year due to medical problems. Monthly premium $552 per month after subsidy. Deductable $12794. This was the best of three plans available. Then you have to find doctors willing to accept you.
They decided to go it alone.
They decided to go it alone.
8
Please touch base with your friend again. If your friend is on a silver plan, his deductible should be much less. If he's on a bronze plan, there is no subsidy. Subsidies are tied to the silver plan.
This is why the ACA is absolutely failing.
My own situation is VERY SIMILAR. High premiums...insanely high deductible...no actual health care.
The ACA can...must...WILL...DIE!
My own situation is VERY SIMILAR. High premiums...insanely high deductible...no actual health care.
The ACA can...must...WILL...DIE!
Our politicians are so exceptional that we can't learned anything from 37 other nations who have been providing their citizens healthcare for decades. What's good, what's hard, what's working, what isn't working. However, their cost per person is 40% lower that our costs and total spending is about 10% less or more.
4
One way to improve the ACA would be t have the federal government mandate - force - health insurance companies to offer health policies on the marketplaces. Why coddle them? There's no reason to allow these companies to exit the marketplaces. It would be a case of "forced market competition". Another possibility is to incorporate "public option" health plans in every zip code. We could also adopt Hillary Clinton's plan to expand Medicare to citizens 55 and up. Never the less, I still support a change to a Medicare-for-all system. Though the ACA certainly could be improved. Republicans are obviously being demagogues about Obamacare.
5
Then they would simply go out of business and you would have little or no choice of health plan Or more likely the premiums would increase even more than the 40 or 50% they have been and the taxpayer would be paying more crushing costs for health care subsidies.
As it is health care consumes 1/6 of the GNP and climbing, and yet life expectancy has gone down for the first time that I can remember.
As it is health care consumes 1/6 of the GNP and climbing, and yet life expectancy has gone down for the first time that I can remember.
2
Obamacare's premium increases are evidence of its failure.
I am waiting for the promised $2500 premium savings that Barry O spoke of.
Meanwhile I am paying higher taxes for the benefit of low achievers who do not have to save to pay the healthcare premiums, as I do.
PS: I do not need maternity or contraceptive care.
I am waiting for the promised $2500 premium savings that Barry O spoke of.
Meanwhile I am paying higher taxes for the benefit of low achievers who do not have to save to pay the healthcare premiums, as I do.
PS: I do not need maternity or contraceptive care.
8
I'm sorry for the increase in your costs but the way to judge whether a system is working is not what happens to one individual but what happens to many and what percentage of the whole they represent. I assume that you understand this and that the Republican Party does as well, which is why, when Rs talk about the plan failing they are actually lying -- because the numbers don't show that. Fixing the weaknesses is smarter and more humane for everyone, including payers like you.
Do you understand how insurance works? Do you think you pay premiums and they go into a bucket just to pay your claims? I don't have a prostate! Why do I have to pay for someone's Prostate cancer! I don't live in a big superfund site, why do I have to pay for cancer caused by chemicals in the water! JFC, I really wish people understood how insurance works.
1
"Obamacare's premium increases are evidence of its failure."
No, it's evidence of insurance industry greed and Republican mendacity.
No, it's evidence of insurance industry greed and Republican mendacity.
Best is for the Senate bill to fail and then for McConnell to have to negotiate with Democrats to fix ObamaCare rather than repeal/replace.
The back-room news is that insurers like BCBS have learned how to cost-shift internally to push things like inability to pay copay on to full-pay BCBS plans. I.e., the ObamaCare markets are now being internally subsidized by full-pay insurance plans. I don't know if that was intended but, complex reasoning between surgery centers, hospitals, and insurers are already "taxing" higher cost private insurance to provide subsidies to ObamaCare....do some research. This is happening.
The back-room news is that insurers like BCBS have learned how to cost-shift internally to push things like inability to pay copay on to full-pay BCBS plans. I.e., the ObamaCare markets are now being internally subsidized by full-pay insurance plans. I don't know if that was intended but, complex reasoning between surgery centers, hospitals, and insurers are already "taxing" higher cost private insurance to provide subsidies to ObamaCare....do some research. This is happening.
2
So we have 3 carriers for marketplace plans in MT. BCBS is taking a 23% increase while the other two markets are taking 4 and 7 % increases (this is less than my private employer plan!!!) BCBS is awful.
"Obamacare is not collapsing, imploding or exploding."
Right. But the Republicans are!
Right. But the Republicans are!
5
Even more frustrating than Republicans lying about the state of the ACA is the American people who refuse to see through it. It is a sad day when people blindly believe what the party they voted for is saying, regardless of the facts and how it will impact them personally.
11
If you are getting free or heavily subsidized health care under ACA then you probably like it. for those of us being crushed financially and medically by it, who pay our own way, it is unfair and intolerable.
2
The private insurance market didn't stop raising premiums because the ACA was passed. You're being crushed by health care expenses because healthcare inflation continues to rise, and you buy private insurance. The ACA slowed the growth of that inflation, but didn't stop it.
Doing without a regulated insurance market isn't going to solve your problem.
Doing without a regulated insurance market isn't going to solve your problem.
I have come to terms with the American stupidity in the funding of its overpriced and underperforming healthcare system. However one thing I do not understand is the way in which the country allows state by state markets. This may have been fine before railways but we are infinitely more mobile today. Risk pools should be as large as possible, surely not state by state. One national pool would surely help spread risks and costs. The current Republican obsession with repeal of Obamacare, their term, has no purpose beyond political posturing and the completer proposed messes after seven years of consideration shows a mental and moral bankruptcy.
Call me naïve but the purpose of government is to govern not posture.
Quite how we wander along living with a chronically ineffective system when all our competitor nations have sorted out their systems and generally have a single payer structure. Paying for the system is the simple part. Stop thinking it's rocket science. Though nowadays even that isn't the challenge it once was.
Call me naïve but the purpose of government is to govern not posture.
Quite how we wander along living with a chronically ineffective system when all our competitor nations have sorted out their systems and generally have a single payer structure. Paying for the system is the simple part. Stop thinking it's rocket science. Though nowadays even that isn't the challenge it once was.
10
They're not so "blinded by their rage against Obama" so much as they just want a great big old tax cut for the rich. Funny, the rage brought on by the great disparity of wealth in the US seems to elect politicians and the party that is dead set to increase that disparity.
6
ACA is a weak bandaid of a law. Trump care is a moral outrage as its alternative. We need a national health care system similar to what the rest of the civilized world has. Stop pretending otherwise, please.
11
I am for single payer healthcare. That being said, I am pragmatic enough to understand that will not happen soon. The saddest note about this current issue is that the GOP is so focused on a WIN and KILL OBAMACARE that all their changes and tweaks have to do with getting votes to get the their version into law. I have not heard one word from ANY GOP senator or representatives on what is good for Americans. I sure do hope that voters remember in 2018 that we are not children with parents making our decisions. These people are elected by us, and paid by us to do a job at OUR bidding. Maybe we can't fire them for their incompetence, but we can sure not re-elect them or others who have so little regard for our health and lives.
6
"The ACA is not perfect, but it is fixable." Well maybe in some other world.
The very best plan of action by the GOP Congress is to subtly cripple the ACA and then ride in with White Hats and "save" us all with their "plan". Because of the "terrible mess" created by crippled Obamacare, the GOP "plan" will have a few defects like limited coverage, high deductibles and high premiums. But be fair, you just can't clean up a disaster all at once.
This gradual approach is far more likely to slip past voters than any repeal or replace the Republicans can cook up. Repeal or replace cannot avoid laying bare the complete disinterest of Republicans in voters' health. That ain't gonna fly.
The very best plan of action by the GOP Congress is to subtly cripple the ACA and then ride in with White Hats and "save" us all with their "plan". Because of the "terrible mess" created by crippled Obamacare, the GOP "plan" will have a few defects like limited coverage, high deductibles and high premiums. But be fair, you just can't clean up a disaster all at once.
This gradual approach is far more likely to slip past voters than any repeal or replace the Republicans can cook up. Repeal or replace cannot avoid laying bare the complete disinterest of Republicans in voters' health. That ain't gonna fly.
6
Trump and the Republicans now own health care. They can no longer blame anyone else when things go wrong.
Why Why Why Why! The lineage of leadership in this country should reflect a constant improvement of implementations by previous administrations.
Wouldn't we all celebrate a President who declares "We will take the ACA, a product of the hard work done by President Obama and his team and make it better! We will fix the problems and continue to make America greater and greater!" Instead we get bile soaked half truths and nihilistic rants to "tear it down".
Wouldn't we all celebrate a President who declares "We will take the ACA, a product of the hard work done by President Obama and his team and make it better! We will fix the problems and continue to make America greater and greater!" Instead we get bile soaked half truths and nihilistic rants to "tear it down".
3
The country has moved on. Even those dead set against Obama care like the ACA. It's Donald Trump and some Republican members of Congress (usually from states that use the ACA the most) who want to obliterate anything and everything with the name Obama attached to it. Rather than fix stuff that could work better they want to "repeal and replace" Well that too will come with its own set of problems so will we repeal and replace Trumpcare? And repeal and replace the one after that? Fix what needs fixing. Congress there are other things you can work on, like repealing and not replacing Trump's twitter.
4
Republicans have peddled FAKE NEWS about ACA failing for a long time. A bipartisan approach to improve ACA rather than repeal is the only way forward for the good of the country that will benefit supporters of both parties. But in the current toxic environment in DC this is a tall order.
2
"Yet Republicans in Congress and the Trump administration continue to peddle horror stories about the A.C.A. as they try to gather the votes for repeal of major provisions of the law."
THE EDITORIAL BOARD
"I'm not aware of any middle class tax increases to pay for the ACA. It's paid for through taxes on investment income for those earning over $250,000 annually, taxes on insurers, the individual mandate, and fees on device manufacturers. On the other hand, we pay for all employer-provided health insurance through taxpayer subsidies. It seems inconsistent to complain about subsidies for the ACA and not subsidies for employer insurance."
Reader Sandy
While all our news media in general and the THE EDITORIAL BOARD can put together is a sadly incomplete argument for support for the ACA in the opinion section.
Like so many important issues the Times just can't produce in depth reportage on health care where it actually lays out the real situation in its entirety and place it on the front page where it belongs rather than the latest stink from the Trump debacle.
THE EDITORIAL BOARD
"I'm not aware of any middle class tax increases to pay for the ACA. It's paid for through taxes on investment income for those earning over $250,000 annually, taxes on insurers, the individual mandate, and fees on device manufacturers. On the other hand, we pay for all employer-provided health insurance through taxpayer subsidies. It seems inconsistent to complain about subsidies for the ACA and not subsidies for employer insurance."
Reader Sandy
While all our news media in general and the THE EDITORIAL BOARD can put together is a sadly incomplete argument for support for the ACA in the opinion section.
Like so many important issues the Times just can't produce in depth reportage on health care where it actually lays out the real situation in its entirety and place it on the front page where it belongs rather than the latest stink from the Trump debacle.
1
Iconoclast, why are you including my comment and attributing it to the NYT editorial board? I'm the poster who said that there were no middle-class tax increases. And there weren't.
This is an editorial, not a piece of investigative journalism. The Times has done excellent investigative journalism on both the ACA and healthcare in general. Do some research.
This is an editorial, not a piece of investigative journalism. The Times has done excellent investigative journalism on both the ACA and healthcare in general. Do some research.
Any health care legislation offering millions more coverage is useless and unfair to the already insured unless there is no less than a proportionate increase in medical professionals, staffing and support services to cover it. As it is highly experienced personnel fave fled insured and managed care groups for other fields of medical service less onerous than the socialist model of Obama care.
This is as close to an endorsement of death panels as I've seen.
If healthcare is a thing that money can buy
The rich will live and the poor will die.
All my trials, Lord....
The rich will live and the poor will die.
All my trials, Lord....
"Mr. McConnell and his party have become so blinded by their rage against Obamacare that they are losing sight of what ought to be their goal: safeguarding the health of their constituents."
When did they ever care about that? It's all about demonizing Democrats, and especially our first Black president, to the point where they believe the lies themselves, all ultimately aimed at being in power, by any means necessary, and cutting taxes for the rich.
When did they ever care about that? It's all about demonizing Democrats, and especially our first Black president, to the point where they believe the lies themselves, all ultimately aimed at being in power, by any means necessary, and cutting taxes for the rich.
3
It's all about tax cuts for the already wealthy.
1
Basically, Americans chose to put in power a party composed of mostly Southern renegades, who betrayed their country once and have done it again.Fiind the places of origin of the key players in the ACA debacle: Alabama, Kentucky, North Carolina, Florida. These individuals have common characteristics. Sadly racism,fundamentalism and a core belief in white supremacy, plus a total disregard for "real Americans" drives the blind, relentless push to destroy a key component of President Obama's legacy.
Sadly, unrelenting effort to destroy the ACA stems from
Sadly, unrelenting effort to destroy the ACA stems from
1
The horror stories are fake news.
They are not substantiated. 45 claiming disaster, without examples is fake.
The disaster will come if the republicans replacement occurs.
They are not substantiated. 45 claiming disaster, without examples is fake.
The disaster will come if the republicans replacement occurs.
2
The partisan games being played are unconscionable and need to stop. Think of how much easier and more successful it could have been had both parties worked together from the beginning to make the ACA a better bill. That would have been a win for all Americans.
5
But it's being cancelled!
1
The answer is a simple one. One that works in every industrialized country except ours.
Universal Single Payer Heath Care. We have a right to demand it and a responsibility to vote for legislators who work for us instead of the special interests.
Universal Single Payer Heath Care. We have a right to demand it and a responsibility to vote for legislators who work for us instead of the special interests.
4
But Mr. McConnell and his party have become so blinded by their rage against Obamacare that they are losing sight of what ought to be their goal: safeguarding the health of their constituents.
They have never had that goal in their sights, they have always been about repealing. Only Trump forced the idea of replacement and we see how that is going. Watch them repeal in the next two weeks and see if Trump signs.
They have never had that goal in their sights, they have always been about repealing. Only Trump forced the idea of replacement and we see how that is going. Watch them repeal in the next two weeks and see if Trump signs.
2
It was not the intent to, as one commenter said, "fail miserably" in her/his region of the US. Nor was it the intent to have premiums sky rocket for many individuals. Quite the opposite. But this is what happens when we are at the mercy of health insurance companies. They are in the business for profit not for the health and welfare of our society.
We are now in a catch 22. A single payer system, I believe, is an impossibility in our present paradigm. It would be nice, but unrealistic to anticipate. So we are left with a law - the ACA - which has already been a success in so many ways but is in need of fixing. That's all. To destroy or weaken it would reflect on the lack of a moral compass within the Republican-led Congress. And, maybe not now, but soon justice will find its way to each and every one of their questionable souls. We'll make sure of that...in the voting booth.
We are now in a catch 22. A single payer system, I believe, is an impossibility in our present paradigm. It would be nice, but unrealistic to anticipate. So we are left with a law - the ACA - which has already been a success in so many ways but is in need of fixing. That's all. To destroy or weaken it would reflect on the lack of a moral compass within the Republican-led Congress. And, maybe not now, but soon justice will find its way to each and every one of their questionable souls. We'll make sure of that...in the voting booth.
7
Not so much a rage against Obamacare as a rage against Obama himself period.
12
The ACA has devolved into catastrophic care with the premiums and deductibles being too high to make effective use of health insurance. With free market capitalism being contrary to human nature when faced with a chronic or life threatening medical condition the delusion that there can healh care markets is the fatal flaw with ACA.
The ACA is conservative Republican Heritage Foundation free market alternative to the failed Clinton Administration era health care reform. The emphasis is on private profit not qualiity medical care. But for internal divisions within the Democratic Party and Republican abstinence Obama could and should have done more. But Obama is by poltical socioeconomic nature a Reagan Republican whose color confused white liberals and black folks alike. Obama was no FDR nor LBJ as expected but no Ike nor Nixon either.
We all have the pre-existing condition of a use-by mortality date. We are all going to die when, where and how we are supposed to. And when we come to a medical crisis we are not going to be doing a socioeconomic cost benefit analysis. Trying to get the cheapest care in the interrest of private share price, dividends, bonuses, stock options and salary increases is not on our minds.We want an end to our suffering and we want to live with the best medical solution no matter the costs.
The closer we can get to single-payer the better off we will be to treating access to health care as a universal civilized human right.
The ACA is conservative Republican Heritage Foundation free market alternative to the failed Clinton Administration era health care reform. The emphasis is on private profit not qualiity medical care. But for internal divisions within the Democratic Party and Republican abstinence Obama could and should have done more. But Obama is by poltical socioeconomic nature a Reagan Republican whose color confused white liberals and black folks alike. Obama was no FDR nor LBJ as expected but no Ike nor Nixon either.
We all have the pre-existing condition of a use-by mortality date. We are all going to die when, where and how we are supposed to. And when we come to a medical crisis we are not going to be doing a socioeconomic cost benefit analysis. Trying to get the cheapest care in the interrest of private share price, dividends, bonuses, stock options and salary increases is not on our minds.We want an end to our suffering and we want to live with the best medical solution no matter the costs.
The closer we can get to single-payer the better off we will be to treating access to health care as a universal civilized human right.
7
in promoting a universal human right, you're advocating removing the rights of those of us who don't want the ACA or single payer. Guess we are an unavoidable casualty?
5
No republican plan has mandated a product. The removal of market choices is anathema to republicans.
1
yes, anyone apposed be a basic human right deserves to be called what they are... a selfish, 5th grader.
2
"ObamaCare" is NOT collapsing, but Republicans are doing everything they can think of to push it along. Insurance companies are holding Congressional feet to the fire, and pulling out of some states for lack of assurances, for the future.
6
The 'Pubs believe, All the education, defense, personal security, influence and Healthcare you can buy like a commodity. And like any other commodity, health and justice and access to services has a price. The men making these decisions and forwarding this agenda have free healthcare for life, for themselves and their families, and they believe they deserve it more than Joe Citizen. This is because Joe Citizen is a commodity as well.
6
Excuse me, but Republicans are not "blinded by rage against Obamacare," and they never have been. It has been a highly successful position to take, a real winner that flipped the House and then the Senate in their favor.
They never had any idea how to replace it because they exist to win elections, not to govern.
All they are now concerned with is how to deliver the tax cuts they promised the Koch brothers and the rest of their donor class using some plausible cover.
They will probably punt on healthcare and move straight to "tax reform." McConnell was put on notice by the billionaire Koch brothers that if the tax cuts they paid him for aren't delivered immediately, there will be no donations for the mid-term election.
And that's the only crisis Republicans are concerned about.
They never had any idea how to replace it because they exist to win elections, not to govern.
All they are now concerned with is how to deliver the tax cuts they promised the Koch brothers and the rest of their donor class using some plausible cover.
They will probably punt on healthcare and move straight to "tax reform." McConnell was put on notice by the billionaire Koch brothers that if the tax cuts they paid him for aren't delivered immediately, there will be no donations for the mid-term election.
And that's the only crisis Republicans are concerned about.
21
The insurance companies are culpable here. They are making more and more profits each year and the amount is staggering. This for profit model that destroys families budgets is unsustainable. It is time for Medicare for all. Why reinvent the wheel when one has a great model already working well.
14
kilika--Let's remember that insurance companies are NOT in the business of paying claims. They are in the business of collecting premiums and paying dividends to stockholders, as well as treating THEMSELVES very, very well. (My husband was a big wig in the insurance industry, so I know what I'm talking about.)
2
Our medical system, the ACA, Medicaid, and Medicare, is under attack. It's about money.
Medicare paid for surgery for me this year at a significant cost for my income level. Did the government give me an undeserved freebie? Here's how I see it:
Our medical system paid a lot of money to the University of Kansas Hospital, which by the way is a wonderful thing about Kansas. The cash went to support doctors, research, facilities, technology, and jobs. It went to the medical infrastructure of this Country, much like money that goes into our transportation system, fire fighters, air traffic control, and military. These systems benefit all; and without them, the rich would not have access to the premium end of this situation. People come from all over the world for our hospitals - rich, poor, and heads of State. Our rich need the taxpayer-funded medical system in place and thriving in order to access what even their money could not buy otherwise. It is infrastructure.
Am I being clear? The government pumped some money into the medical infrastructure in my name. Like the Brooklyn Bridge, the medical system handles all people; but the rich would have to take a boat without it.
The rich want the rest of us to have less benefit from the infrastructure. We send our kids to war. We pay taxes, SS, and insurance. We make it possible. In a few hours, the system performed a miracle fore me. I deserved that. If you are poor, you are invisible.
We all breathe the same air!
Medicare paid for surgery for me this year at a significant cost for my income level. Did the government give me an undeserved freebie? Here's how I see it:
Our medical system paid a lot of money to the University of Kansas Hospital, which by the way is a wonderful thing about Kansas. The cash went to support doctors, research, facilities, technology, and jobs. It went to the medical infrastructure of this Country, much like money that goes into our transportation system, fire fighters, air traffic control, and military. These systems benefit all; and without them, the rich would not have access to the premium end of this situation. People come from all over the world for our hospitals - rich, poor, and heads of State. Our rich need the taxpayer-funded medical system in place and thriving in order to access what even their money could not buy otherwise. It is infrastructure.
Am I being clear? The government pumped some money into the medical infrastructure in my name. Like the Brooklyn Bridge, the medical system handles all people; but the rich would have to take a boat without it.
The rich want the rest of us to have less benefit from the infrastructure. We send our kids to war. We pay taxes, SS, and insurance. We make it possible. In a few hours, the system performed a miracle fore me. I deserved that. If you are poor, you are invisible.
We all breathe the same air!
8
It is time the younger Democrats teach the GOP to learn some simple mathematics as to how staying with ACA will TRULY help the healthcare industry and provide healthcare for the population that absolutely need it .
GOP need to read and learn what New England Journal of Medicine published much before the elections how ACA will help after initial start up troubles .
GOP need to read and learn what New England Journal of Medicine published much before the elections how ACA will help after initial start up troubles .
4
Good info. Work together and solve this . They will be heros if they give us good affordable health insurance.
3
Although the article states that the risk for people in the exchanges is similar to that of the employer provided pool, why not amend the ACA to require insurers to consider both groups as a single pool. Also why allow an insurer to offer policies or not by county? Simply demand by law that they must offer ACA policies over the entire state if they want to participate in either the ACA or employer based pools. Facing with being barred from selling in entire states, those presently selective insurers will find a way. We seem to forget that selling insurance at all requires a government (State) license. Comply with the rules or turn in the license. Most of the problems with the ACA are based on the fact that insurance industry lobbyists wrote the rules in 2010.
5
Employer-provided health care is NOT a single pool. Each group health plan is negotiated separately, so the size of the company, the average age of their employees, and the historical medical costs (think one really sick person in a small-to-mid-sized company) of that group plan all factor into the per-person cost of health care.
That is one reason that companies find reasons to purge their companies of older employees, and why it is harder to get employment over 50. Based on age alone chances are you will bring up the average health care costs for their insurance pool.
There is a prominent health insurance company that did exactly that: Forced their employees to train their overseas replacements. It's quite clear that they will be re-hiring and bringing a good number of the jobs back - but the cohort they will be hiring will be primarily millennials while the people RIFed are primarily boomers.
That is one reason that companies find reasons to purge their companies of older employees, and why it is harder to get employment over 50. Based on age alone chances are you will bring up the average health care costs for their insurance pool.
There is a prominent health insurance company that did exactly that: Forced their employees to train their overseas replacements. It's quite clear that they will be re-hiring and bringing a good number of the jobs back - but the cohort they will be hiring will be primarily millennials while the people RIFed are primarily boomers.
1
Obamacare is like Frankenstein's monster- alive and yet fundamentally dead. It is an attempt to provide decent health care to people who can't afford it, within a system that will only give you what you paid for (or slightly less.) It was a nice try, but it will not end well. It shouldn't have been experimented with. When we have the best universal single payer health care system in the world, America will Seem Great Again. In the mean time, it is proving difficult is figuring out a way to give massive tax cuts to the rich. Who knew taking away health care would be so difficult? Apparently, some Americans believe it is better to have Frankenstein's monster over for dinner than the Grim Reaper. The monster showed a glimmer of compassion now and then.
2
Republicans have not lost sight of what IS their goal: massive tax subsidies for the wealthy, funded by slashing health care for the most vulnerable. Once you accept the fact that is their motivation, the Republicans' lies about the ACA, and the dismal future the proposed 'health care legislation' truly will create, makes perfectly good sense.
5
Forgive me for sounding like a nag, but the key question for the Affordable Care Act is not the Act itself, but in the broader context, can we afford it? It is truly wonderful to help struggling folks get good medical attention by subsidizing their payments, but with several trillion in debt, a whopping budget deficit, and a reluctance to pay taxes, can we start new entitlement programs that might grow and engulf our finances down the road? It is convenient to cloak the Act in how much good it is doing and trot out some youth benefiting from subsidized care, but the hard and inconvenient truth is we must somehow pay for this. Further, as long as we are going to subsidize our less well off, why not do it in a more efficient manner and move on towards universal, single payer health care and get rid of the cumbersome insurers?
10
we can afford it because the ACA did not add to the deficit. The question you may actually be asking is, Do we want to pay for it. Should the rich pay for it. I would say yes, but I am not sure if you would. A single payer would be the best of course.
2
All excellent points. In the end it is all about priorities. Do we provide some level of basic health care for our citizens, including those less fortunate? Or do we continue to allow Congress to subsidize special interests they pay for their reelections like the military industrial complex, the oil and gas industry, Wall Street, the pharmaceutical and insurance industries, etc. etc.? Get rid of special interest money in politics (or at least back to reasonable levels), and I believe our elected representatives will focus on the right priorities.
1
We are the wealthiest country in history. If we cannot afford to take care of our sick, no one can, And yet, many countries from the industrialized west do take care of their sick, and often with better health outcomes. These are facts.
The reasons for rising costs are well understood -- no price transparency, a pharma market regulated for the benefit of pharma investors, not patients, a failure to provide universal coverage (which encourages preventative care and thus reduces cost, etc.
If the GOP had an honest interest in reducing the cost of health care, and was willing to negotiate with Democrats on a moderate, middle way, it would be straightforward, if not easy. But the GOP philosophy for at least 9 years, if not 19, has been to obstruct Democratic initiatives and reject compromise, favoring policies for the benefit of the rich rather than the average citizen.
The ACA is a policy with a conservative philosophical foundation, one of the few such policies that actually helps the middle class. Why can't the GOP get behind efforts to perfect it?
The reasons for rising costs are well understood -- no price transparency, a pharma market regulated for the benefit of pharma investors, not patients, a failure to provide universal coverage (which encourages preventative care and thus reduces cost, etc.
If the GOP had an honest interest in reducing the cost of health care, and was willing to negotiate with Democrats on a moderate, middle way, it would be straightforward, if not easy. But the GOP philosophy for at least 9 years, if not 19, has been to obstruct Democratic initiatives and reject compromise, favoring policies for the benefit of the rich rather than the average citizen.
The ACA is a policy with a conservative philosophical foundation, one of the few such policies that actually helps the middle class. Why can't the GOP get behind efforts to perfect it?
1
Kentucky is one of the states that benefited most from Obamacare, yet it continually re-elects a Senator bent on destroying it. If he succeeds, maybe the voters in his state will smarten up but I'm not betting on it. The rest of the world, which long ago found out that non-profit health coverage is cheaper and better for all, looks on in bemusement as our lawmakers continue to kowtow to the insurance industry and big pharma at the expense of the health of its citizenry. Save the ACA as a stopgap, kick the Republicans out of Congress, kick Trump out of the White House and institute Medicare for all.
10
ACA has been damaged by the Republicans; but if they fail the disastrous AHCA, there is no telling if they might just go MAD by following Trump suggestion by repealing it without any replacement at all. They are known to cut the nose to spite the face so this is a possibility
3
But they will find a way to blame it on Obamacare either way.
1
We are trying to treat a symptom with insurance. Real problem is sky rocketing healthcare costs. Treatment costs much more than rest of world with less successful outcomes. Why an MRI costs 5k or a 30 minute surgery costs 30k or a dose of chemo costs 35k is why insurance costs are out of control.
15
Maybe some states that are rural-dominated beyond a certain threshold can get additional subsidies, or be paired with some other states.
1
It's called one payer....
I'm a Canadian working in the US, recruited by a large research university. I have decent health insurance with my employer. But as my spouse and I get older, and the US gets crazier and more polarized, we have a perfect health care plan: stay here, where my salary is much higher than I can get in Canada, until retirement, then take our money and move back to Canada. Canada educated us - extremely well, and without debt. When we found pickings in our fields slim, we moved. One more move back later, and we'll hopefully avoid medical bankruptcy in old age. I know we're lucky to have the option.
24
SW, I am so glad that you are moving back to Canada after you were extremely well educated without debt; when you are old and feeble and in need of care...AND not contributing much to the tax base. Great. Hope you are the minority. Looks like some current American values have really rubbed off on you. Not all Americans think like that, but from my perspective even one is too many.
1
SW, have you been paying into Canada's health insurance system while working in the US? If so, your plan sounds great.
1
@SW: Canada must just LOVE moochers like you -- go to college on public funds -- get a great job in the USA -- then return, when you want free health care in old age!
When the ACA started we were told that 22 million people were without insurance and that was the purpose of the ACA to insure these people. Today, under the current ACA law there are 33 million people without insurance. Most are young 18-45 years old. They cannot afford the premiums and feel like they do not need all that coverage so they opt to pay the penalty, a one time deduction from their income taxes which is less costlier then the policy cost. So, how did the ACA improve that? It didn't. My premiums went from $300.00 a month before the ACA to $750.00 a month. I work for a living and cannot afford this. My deductibles are 7,000 per person, which we will never reach so most of the Dr. visits and tests are out of pocket, the insurance company pays nothing. So while this ACA law is draining me of my resources to live on, their are people out there that are getting a freebie paid for by me and other hard working Americans, and we are forced by the government to do this. That is communism. The Republican bill leaves too much of the ACA in place, it is not good. We need to go back the way it was before the ACA. Also, in the state where I live only one provider is left. The other 15 quit selling health policies and that is happening all over the country. The ACA is a disaster and if this new bill passes it also will be a disaster. Medicare was originally set up for the elderly, and then the bottom fell out of the economy and people found doctors to get them on medicare.
7
Your experience is exactly like that of millions of citizens who are rightfully skeptical of single payer or any governmental solution. Single payer advocates use unfair comparisons to push their ideologically slanted view. Let states experiment and quit trying to force us all into a system many of us don't want.
3
There is another category of Obamacare refugees that could be called "insured but not covered." They are the millions who cannot afford to use their health care.
Covered? Check. Included in Obamacare success rate? Check. Included in those 20 million who will "lose" their insurance? Double check.
They will simply be moving from one side of the ledger to the other, but on neither side can they afford their health care.
Covered? Check. Included in Obamacare success rate? Check. Included in those 20 million who will "lose" their insurance? Double check.
They will simply be moving from one side of the ledger to the other, but on neither side can they afford their health care.
3
Perhaps if your state got onto the MediCAID expansion then your State of Oklahoma might be able to have better choices by way of different policies. Who knows, maybe you'd be eligible for some "freebies" that you are so angry about. MediCARE is not the same as MediCAID. The former is for the totally disabled under your retirement age and available for everyone over 65. The latter, MediCAID is for people that meet your State's requirements for income that correlates to the regional poverty rate. The more active a state gets on the stick to embrace the notion of getting as many people medical coverage, the more affordable and plan options become available. Right now you live in a state, among many others in the plains that has used every trick and resisted any efforts to include its own citizens in taking advantage of the ACA(Obamacare). There's an election coming up in November, 2018. Vote in some new people if you want affordable health insurance.
2
Single payer, non-profit health insurance. It works. It's the only method that works well.
30
The introduction of employer based deductible insurance created this mess. Physician groups providing concierge service for everyday problems are inexpensive. Insurance for catastrophic events in a competitive market works well. We know what single payer looks like.... the VA. Why go a route that offers no choice and lousy service?
1
You think you know what single payer looks like in this mess of a country qua the VA, but that is NOT single payer non-profit insurance, it is a monolithic medical provider. Single payer non-profit works superbly in most countries. It provides choice. It provides good service. It pays providers. It doesn't create any more rationing or wait times than already exist here. Those are lies promulgated by those interested in valueless middle man profit. I know. I have lived in countries with excellent non-profit single payer systems and in this crime of a US for-profit insurance scam. The single pay, government overseen systems are radically superior. So are their health outcomes.
This editorial gives too much credit to Mr. McConnell and other Republican leaders in saying that "they are losing sight of what ought to be their goal: safeguarding the health of their constituents." That was NEVER a goal of repeal-and-replace. The goal was reducing the government's involvement and taxes, wrapped in a veneer of increased choice and the free market. I never once saw the Republicans state their goals in terms of coverage, cost, or quality of care. Donald Trump at one time did make such statements, his infamous "better care for more people at lower cost" claim, but he seems to have completely abandoned that in favor of a PR event in which he signs something.
36
What the GOP refuses to acknowledge is that the funding cuts to Medicare will have a severe and adverse effect on anyone who presently may have coverage through an employer but would like, at some point, to retire.
The party of self-reliance is proposing this for the working class, who save for retirement and would like to have some measure of comfort after 30 or 40 years of working hard, raising a family and living within their means. There will be limits on the coverage provided in retirement and any savings you may have will be swallowed up by even one health challenge. So, that comfortable retirement you have planned for will now be a trip to no treatment or no money to live on.
Warren Buffet, an actual billionaire (who has no issues releases his tax returns) has said the plan is nothing more than tax relief for the rich.
So, who, exactly does this bill serve?
The party of self-reliance is proposing this for the working class, who save for retirement and would like to have some measure of comfort after 30 or 40 years of working hard, raising a family and living within their means. There will be limits on the coverage provided in retirement and any savings you may have will be swallowed up by even one health challenge. So, that comfortable retirement you have planned for will now be a trip to no treatment or no money to live on.
Warren Buffet, an actual billionaire (who has no issues releases his tax returns) has said the plan is nothing more than tax relief for the rich.
So, who, exactly does this bill serve?
23
There is only one reason the Republicans want to get rid of the ACA, and that is because Obama did it. Otherwise, any sane legislator would just want to fix the problems and take credit for "saving" it. Through legislation, since they own Congress, they could change it for their own purposes. But, they have been promising for years that they will get rid of it, and are willing to put people's health at risk for spite. How low can you go? Pretty low.
28
The Republicans are about to make the same foolish mistakes the Democrats did by coming up with a single party plan instead of a bipartisan plan. We know it will have many problems, the Republicans will own the problems by themselves, and the Democrats won't help them fix it.
Only bipartisan legislation gives both parties a stake in the outcome and incentive to continue to learn and refine the system until we get it right.
Only bipartisan legislation gives both parties a stake in the outcome and incentive to continue to learn and refine the system until we get it right.
5
MikeInMi, you are superficially correct but seem to have forgotten that the Democrats took a year to get the ducks in a row, held over 100 hearings on the ACA, in the process jettisoning the public option b/o Republican opposition and in order to keep commercial insurers, who feared the competition, on board. Despite getting numerous amendments added in both House and Senate committees and incorporated in the final legislation, the Republicans voted en masse against the final law. Remember that McConnell had vowed to make Obama a one term President and Republican opposition was just one of many manifestations of this vow. The House voted to repeal the law over 50 times, at $15M a pop (the cost of bringing any legislation to the floor for a vote). Also don't forget that while the SCOTUS affirmed the constitutionality of the law, it also provided a loophole that allowed states to not take the Medicaid expansion even though it is paid for almost entirely with federal dollars. Here in MO that means that my state is refusing 2 Billion federal tax dollars per year.
Contrast the Democratic process with Republican secretive attempts to "repeal and replace". The ACA was and is the Democrats' ante in the game which the Republicans refuse to play. Why should they fold now? As Napoleon said: "Don't interfere with your enemy when he's making a (foolish) mistake."
Contrast the Democratic process with Republican secretive attempts to "repeal and replace". The ACA was and is the Democrats' ante in the game which the Republicans refuse to play. Why should they fold now? As Napoleon said: "Don't interfere with your enemy when he's making a (foolish) mistake."
2
You do know around 98.99999% of ObamaCare is decades (yes more than 2) of previous GOP Initiatives, Plans, Goals,..as it pertains to HealthCare?
Goes back as far to Ole Ike, Nixon picked up on it later, Newton (and the Gang) ran with it in the 90s, my main man Romney was such a fan; he actually implemented it.
Now maybe I'm equating Bi-partisan Plan with Stealing,..but I don't see it that way.
Goes back as far to Ole Ike, Nixon picked up on it later, Newton (and the Gang) ran with it in the 90s, my main man Romney was such a fan; he actually implemented it.
Now maybe I'm equating Bi-partisan Plan with Stealing,..but I don't see it that way.
ACA is being sabotaged by the cynical GOP which injects fear and uncertainty in an effort to induce insurers to leave or increase premiums. Instead of working with Democrats to fix the flaws, Ryan and McConnell have opted to carry out their pledge to unilaterally annihilate Obama's legacy. It's disgusting how little the GOP cares for vulnerable, sick Americans.
35
My family member lives in Orlando. Used to be multiple insurers but only one is left now & the market's chaotic. The deductibles are too high, so he doesn't go to the doctor. Can't afford it after paying the sky-high premiums! People in Congress ought to be required to sign-up. THen maybe they would figure out how to fix it, rather than destroy the bare bones health care now provided!
8
There are some things that are nearly impossible to understand.
If the states had been required to open their exchanges, and expand Medicaid coverage- just as the hated mandate required the purchase of health insurance by even the young and healthy- everything seems to confirm that the final ACA would have been even more successful. There would have been lower deductibles.
It begins to sound like Medicare, or some kind of health care cooperative-except for the fact that the private sector profit margin was left breathing.
It reminds me of that old blues tune by Willie Dixon, Killing Floor.
We should have "juged" the profit motive and left it on the floor to bleed out.
Who can shamelessly say that my profits result from investing in your illness?
If the states had been required to open their exchanges, and expand Medicaid coverage- just as the hated mandate required the purchase of health insurance by even the young and healthy- everything seems to confirm that the final ACA would have been even more successful. There would have been lower deductibles.
It begins to sound like Medicare, or some kind of health care cooperative-except for the fact that the private sector profit margin was left breathing.
It reminds me of that old blues tune by Willie Dixon, Killing Floor.
We should have "juged" the profit motive and left it on the floor to bleed out.
Who can shamelessly say that my profits result from investing in your illness?
5
I'm almost 75 and have Medicare through Fidelis Care. Of course I'm very grateful to Lyndon J. for this. Mr wife is 64 and has Medicaid through the ACA. Three years ago her prime care physician thought that she might have lung cancer (she's never smoked, but she was born and grew up not far from Beijing). We went to NYU Medical Center in Manhattan, and Dr Crawford confirmed her PCP's diagnosis. He operated on her and removed the upper eighth of her left lung, where there were two cancerous tumors. She was back to work and jogging within two weeks. The ACA covered most of the bill, just as government healthcare programs do in most of the civilized world.
Her monthly premium is well under $50, and her deductibles are virtually non-existent. It"s hard for me to understand why Mitch M. is so angry at the ACA (which he calls Obamacare), other than it was the product of our country's first black president. If they end it, then it would only be fare to require all members of Congress (including MM) to use their new health plan exclusively and, in addition, to require the president, VP, and all his cabinet members to do the same. As Katie Boyle (my grandmother) used to say: "If it's good enough for the goose, it's good enough for the gander."
If MM's new plan is good enough for us peasants, it should be good enough for MM and his royals. Don't cheat! You made it; you should own it.
Her monthly premium is well under $50, and her deductibles are virtually non-existent. It"s hard for me to understand why Mitch M. is so angry at the ACA (which he calls Obamacare), other than it was the product of our country's first black president. If they end it, then it would only be fare to require all members of Congress (including MM) to use their new health plan exclusively and, in addition, to require the president, VP, and all his cabinet members to do the same. As Katie Boyle (my grandmother) used to say: "If it's good enough for the goose, it's good enough for the gander."
If MM's new plan is good enough for us peasants, it should be good enough for MM and his royals. Don't cheat! You made it; you should own it.
32
Surely the New York Times Editorial Board is made up of "employer paid" health insurance recipients. You will also find many of those with the politically and convenient delayed "Cadillac Tax," will also agree with the board. Ask yourself, however, who is paying for it? I can assure you it is not the so-called, "rich."
4
The solution to the ACA flaws is obvious -- take control of Congress away from the Republican Party which no longer cares about the voters it supposedly represents.
10
Blue Cross just raised our premiums 21%. We now pay $21,000 a year for insurance with a $6,000 deductible. My husband and I are not smokers, nor are we overweight. I run 9 to 12 miles/week. We are all but vegetarians. In other words, when we do our best to stay healthy, but when something goes wrong - we pay through the nose for it. Minor neck problem? P.T. costs $300. Need a mole removed and biopsied? That will be another $300. We have health insurance but we avoid going to the doctor because we pay for it, even with insurance. This is a sick system. Single payer is the only way to go. We can't wait to turn 65. Sad. So Sad. What a nation of geniuses!
6
You really want the people who created the mess you're in to be in charge of implementing single payer? Really? Think it's bad now, just wait. Get politicians out of healthcare.
2
McConnell and Ryan must make Americans think Obamacare is really, really bad so they don't focus on how the House and Senate Republican bills are based on deceptions.
They make little pretense about slashing federal funding for Medicaid. The deception is that they leave it to states to do the dirty work - cut enrollment of poor children, mothers, elderly, etc - or raise state taxes. So, Republican Representatives and Senators will be forcing hard decisions and higher taxes back upon the state's they represent. Talk about walking the plank!
They would destroy Private insurance for all except those who are healthy - currently. Both HCRA (by Ryan) and BCRA (by McConnell) make a pretzel of our private insurance by twisting provisions to give the impression they are keeping the broadly popular parts of Obamacare, such as prohibiting the exclusion of people with pre-existing conditions. They've left the wording - plans cannot exclude people with pre-existing conditions - but have made the coverage sick people need unaffordable.
And the press has hardly mentioned the billions of dollars in cost shifts, especially to Medicaid expansion states. So, in my area, Rep Erik Paulson voted for the House bill. If the Senate bill passes, these cost shifts to states will likely be in the joint resolution bill. Ryan will pressure Erik Paulson and many other Republican Representatives to support raising his state's taxes so federal taxes can be cut.
Lies and deceptions should not prevail
They make little pretense about slashing federal funding for Medicaid. The deception is that they leave it to states to do the dirty work - cut enrollment of poor children, mothers, elderly, etc - or raise state taxes. So, Republican Representatives and Senators will be forcing hard decisions and higher taxes back upon the state's they represent. Talk about walking the plank!
They would destroy Private insurance for all except those who are healthy - currently. Both HCRA (by Ryan) and BCRA (by McConnell) make a pretzel of our private insurance by twisting provisions to give the impression they are keeping the broadly popular parts of Obamacare, such as prohibiting the exclusion of people with pre-existing conditions. They've left the wording - plans cannot exclude people with pre-existing conditions - but have made the coverage sick people need unaffordable.
And the press has hardly mentioned the billions of dollars in cost shifts, especially to Medicaid expansion states. So, in my area, Rep Erik Paulson voted for the House bill. If the Senate bill passes, these cost shifts to states will likely be in the joint resolution bill. Ryan will pressure Erik Paulson and many other Republican Representatives to support raising his state's taxes so federal taxes can be cut.
Lies and deceptions should not prevail
2
To me, this 'rage' on the part of the GOP is a cover for their obvious inability to govern. They just don't have a clue. So, they stick to silly 'free market', trickle down absurdities that have simply exposed their hypocrisy. Many Americans fall for these bromides that the libertarians, Koch Bros, Mercers, etc distribute through Fox News, Breibart, etc.
Rumor: McConnell and Ryan are now consulting with Newt for some clues on how to at least look like they are governing. We would call it dressing up a pig with lipstick but I believe pigs are more intelligent and cleaner to boot. So, let's not insult pigs. Their only sin is gluttony.
Rumor: McConnell and Ryan are now consulting with Newt for some clues on how to at least look like they are governing. We would call it dressing up a pig with lipstick but I believe pigs are more intelligent and cleaner to boot. So, let's not insult pigs. Their only sin is gluttony.
13
If 71 percent of Americans want Congress to fix Obamacare and not repeal it, why pray tell did the Republicans win the election on a promise to repeal it. The Republicans should repeal it and send us back to the way things were before Obamacare and let the Democrats convince the people that they should have another shot at it. But actually no Democrat is claiming that he can fix Obamacare. They all recognize that it can not be fixed. The basic idea was to force everybody to buy insurance so that the healthy will pay for health care for the sick rather than what happens in a free market where people buy health insurance when they are healthy so they will have it if and when they become sick. But the government is not willing to do what is necessary to make healthy people buy insurance at excessive rates. They are not willing to impose and enforce a penalty sufficiently high to work. And SCOTUS held that the penalty that was imposed by the law was only constitutional because it wouldn't work and therefore was only a nuisance tax. The states it said could impose such a mandate but not the feds. So the only possible fix is massive subsidies of the insurance companies paid for by the taxpayers and the rich, which perhaps explains why Obamacare is more popular now. But if the feds are going to pay for the health care of people can't or wont take care of themselves, do we really want to subsidize the insurance companies as well as the doctors and hospitals. Surely, no!
If 71 percent of Americans want Congress to fix Obamacare and not repeal it, why pray tell did the Republicans win the election on a promise to repeal it.
Simply put, the candidate LIED. He said he would give Americans better cheaper and more beautiful health care.
Then there is the ongoing investigation about how Russia aka Putin interfered with the eclection.
Simply put, the candidate LIED. He said he would give Americans better cheaper and more beautiful health care.
Then there is the ongoing investigation about how Russia aka Putin interfered with the eclection.
As a small sized multi state employer the ACA is a mess. It isn't insurance, deductibles are so high no one ever gets to use the policy. We just pay out of pocket for our staff, making it more like some protection racket. Roughly half the country agrees its a mess and a lot of people don't want to be shoved into a VA type system. Let states offer options so those who don't want single payer, who don't want a modified or existing ACA, who want catastrophic care for insurance without any mandates and allow that choice without penalties. Subsidize the truly needy but leave the rest of us alone.
4
Spoken like someone who can afford insurance or to pay out of pocket, whatever. Someone who has never had a health care/health cost crisis and blames those who do for creating their own negative reality.
Spoken like someone without a rational non-partisan bone in his head. Someone who refuses to recognize that the ACA was flawed from the beginning in an attempt to get at least a shrug from the "You shall not pass (anything)" Republicans of the Obama era.
When you cut the pool of insured in half, when you remove all the financial supports, when you then encourage half the nation not to accept paid-for care for the neediest, this is what you get: a Republican hash that they can convince people like you is what "government health care", "socialist health care" looks like.
And you believe them.
I'd wish you luck with your return to "free market" health care, but I'm holding out for single payer and the long-awaited devastation of of our sinful health insurance industry.
Spoken like someone without a rational non-partisan bone in his head. Someone who refuses to recognize that the ACA was flawed from the beginning in an attempt to get at least a shrug from the "You shall not pass (anything)" Republicans of the Obama era.
When you cut the pool of insured in half, when you remove all the financial supports, when you then encourage half the nation not to accept paid-for care for the neediest, this is what you get: a Republican hash that they can convince people like you is what "government health care", "socialist health care" looks like.
And you believe them.
I'd wish you luck with your return to "free market" health care, but I'm holding out for single payer and the long-awaited devastation of of our sinful health insurance industry.
1
"leave the rest of us alone" And will you promise to leave the rest of us alone when you have some serious and possibly life-threatening condition that is not covered by your skimpy and cheap policy? Or will you be crying at the emergency room for care you know you will never pay for under the hospital's obligation to turn no one away?
Everyone wants medical coverage and care for a modest cost. We got used to coverage from our employers and never saw the true cost of our health. Where should the money for our future care come from??? Should doctors be made to accept a salary equal to that of the average car salesman or bake shop owner? What incentive will they have to put in all those years of education and continuing education? And why subject themselves to the risk of bankruptcy from a mistake as medical malpractice? Not to mention why would anyone make life-altering choices for tricky cases knowing that their choice will change this person's life forever, maybe not for the better? There's a reason they make a lot now.
A more practical approach would be to take the money out of the insurance system. There is no constitutional right for some administrator or clerk to make a living standing between us and our care. I say leave the people who do the hands-on care alone and lose the cost of the intermediaries. We know that with the baby boomer bulge we are going to need a nearly endless supply of caregivers. Put the money there.
Everyone wants medical coverage and care for a modest cost. We got used to coverage from our employers and never saw the true cost of our health. Where should the money for our future care come from??? Should doctors be made to accept a salary equal to that of the average car salesman or bake shop owner? What incentive will they have to put in all those years of education and continuing education? And why subject themselves to the risk of bankruptcy from a mistake as medical malpractice? Not to mention why would anyone make life-altering choices for tricky cases knowing that their choice will change this person's life forever, maybe not for the better? There's a reason they make a lot now.
A more practical approach would be to take the money out of the insurance system. There is no constitutional right for some administrator or clerk to make a living standing between us and our care. I say leave the people who do the hands-on care alone and lose the cost of the intermediaries. We know that with the baby boomer bulge we are going to need a nearly endless supply of caregivers. Put the money there.
1
Why isn't this being compared to car or homeowners or renters insurance?
With the exception of those who are too young to purchase either health, car or home insurances, why isn't it mandatory?
You buy a new home, a new car, you have a young healthy body, and its fine. You don't buy insurance and one day the neighbors tree falls on your roof, you hit a truck on the road, you get cancer.
Now what? You sell your home because you can't afford to repair it, you sell you car, but still have to pay the damage it caused, you die from cancer because you didn't buy health insurance.
Simple.
With the exception of those who are too young to purchase either health, car or home insurances, why isn't it mandatory?
You buy a new home, a new car, you have a young healthy body, and its fine. You don't buy insurance and one day the neighbors tree falls on your roof, you hit a truck on the road, you get cancer.
Now what? You sell your home because you can't afford to repair it, you sell you car, but still have to pay the damage it caused, you die from cancer because you didn't buy health insurance.
Simple.
8
Nobody HAS TO buy a home, nor a car.
Many people rent, or take public transit.
But there is NO escape from the ACA.
Many people rent, or take public transit.
But there is NO escape from the ACA.
Nonsense. You just pay a tax penalty if you can afford insurance and refuse to buy coverage. What you can't escape is your body eventually failing you.
Single payer is the ONLY answer, but the Republicans will never come close to allowing it. And they will always call Obamacare an utter failure--not because it is, but because they want it to be. God forbid that a Democrat, especially Barack Obama, be credited with success! Those 22 million Americans that will lose healthcare under a Republican bill? Why should Republicans care about them, as long as they win a political victory?
2
Read the entries here by people who are being punished by the ACA. We pay nearly $30,000 year for nothing. Nothing. We don't want single payer. Anyone with severe health problems knows that expensive rarely used treatments will be denied under single payer in preference for less effective cheaper options. I know, it is happening to me now under the ACA.
3
Please provide one single analysis by Kaiser that shows the problems with a Obamacare. There is none. Kaiser has been at the forefront of supporting and defending it even before it became law. It should becrepealed outright.
1
Send this to each of your congressional representatives. Let them know we know the truth. Obfuscation has no business in leading this country.
1
Republicans have systematically sabotaged the ACA since day one. The ACA is limping most in those states where Republicans have done their best to opt out. By intentionally crippling its roll out they can now point to its "flaws."
7
The ACA model was a failure before it was even rolled out. Healthy young people couldn't even be forced to buy into it. They didn't want a bloated policy with benefits they didn't need at a cost they couldn't afford. Moreover, Americans weren't so thrilled to have those extra benefits that they were willing to pay exorbitant rates (while others were getting them at a huge discount).
The assumptions about Obamacare were simply wrong. The only thing successful about it were the subsidies and the loosening of Medicaid requirements, although its costs and fraud ballooned to levels that would be financially ruinous if extended to the rest of the population.
The assumptions about Obamacare were simply wrong. The only thing successful about it were the subsidies and the loosening of Medicaid requirements, although its costs and fraud ballooned to levels that would be financially ruinous if extended to the rest of the population.
3
The ACA is a disaster for our company and our family. Nothing to do with Republicans.
2
"Obama care is dead--the Republicans will do much better."
Donald J. Trump---May 28, 2017
President Trump expects Americans to believe that the ACA has collapsed upon itself because he has declared that to be the case. True believers that still support this absurd man playing a president for the TV cameras probably swallow that line. The rest of the public who possess critical thinking skills see through the scam.
Donald J. Trump---May 28, 2017
President Trump expects Americans to believe that the ACA has collapsed upon itself because he has declared that to be the case. True believers that still support this absurd man playing a president for the TV cameras probably swallow that line. The rest of the public who possess critical thinking skills see through the scam.
7
Besides all the reasons for ACA problems cited, if you stand on an air hose long enough, the patient will be deprived of oxygen and likely succumb. The Repubs have been doing that for over seven years now.
4
It's clear to an outsider who enjoys a single payer halth care system that puts yours to shame and who has spent a great deal of time in the U.S. that you attemots are doomed until you do two things: rein in your predatory legal system and curb your health industry's rapacious billing system. Until you fix these two systemic problems there's not enough money in America to make health care work.
8
So-called "Obamacare" might not be collapsing as thoroughly as so many Republican politicians proclaim. But if prominent Republicans, or a group acting in concert following a plan, repeats the Big Lie often enough, contemptuously rejecting all evidence to the contrary, in time The Big Lie becomes true. They can will it to fail.
Republicans have long wanted to destroy this program simply because secret Muslim Kenyan-born "Obama" is associated with it, like its disappearance will exorcize a demon in our midst. And thanks to their ceaseless campaign to vilify, undermine and sabotage it -- openly and surreptitiously -- it probably will. And after it's gone Republican politicians will replace it with nothing, gambling that Republican tribalism will save them from their folly in spite of everything.
Republicans have long wanted to destroy this program simply because secret Muslim Kenyan-born "Obama" is associated with it, like its disappearance will exorcize a demon in our midst. And thanks to their ceaseless campaign to vilify, undermine and sabotage it -- openly and surreptitiously -- it probably will. And after it's gone Republican politicians will replace it with nothing, gambling that Republican tribalism will save them from their folly in spite of everything.
3
Beware, as this 'rush to the right' continues, many of the same arguments used against Obamacare, if successful, next will be used against Social Security....
Both work, both could use a tweaking to work better, both will be thrown under the bus to see if they can be 'repealed'...
'Decline' isn't a one-step affair.... it's a ride....
Both work, both could use a tweaking to work better, both will be thrown under the bus to see if they can be 'repealed'...
'Decline' isn't a one-step affair.... it's a ride....
3
Once again this NYT piece makes the false claim that under current proposals, 22 million would be kicked off their insurance. NO! The CBO scoring concludes vast majority of those people would CHOOSE to go uninsured because the mandate would be lifted. Where in the constitution does it provide that the government can force you or me or anyone to purchase a commercial product, or pay a fine or otherwise be in violation of law? Justify it all you want, the ACA is a disaster - my ACA premiums are now $3,400/mo, with a $14,400 annual deductible, so I am out of pocket over $50k every year (for a 60-year-old couple) before receiving ANY benefit from the ACA except an annual checkup. I am at the high end. At the low end, it is literally killing one of my farm employees, who previously had no health insurance, but great medical care through the rural health cooperative. Now he has a fully subsidized ACA policy, but zero access to health care because the deductible is $6,000 per year and he makes only $18k, has no money to clear that hurdle. He is off his diabetes meds and as a result the ACA is literally killing him. Shameful and destructive. Yet the advocates of the ACA would list Visente and his wife, at the lower end of the economy, and my wife and me, at the upper end, as ACA "successes" who are now "insured" through their efforts. This thing has reduced access to care for many, and made it more expensive for everyone. NYT, get the facts and stop defending this pig.
4
Many of these are the same Americans who are paying high premiums now but cannot afford to access their health care because of the exorbitant out-of-pockets.
These people have been included in the "success" rate of Obamacare, which has the dubious distinction of having proved you can be insured and not have access.
The Editorial Board has no problem with making people pay for something they cannot use as long as those payments subsidize someone else. Better yet, in their view, just subsidize everyone for products they don't want.
These people have been included in the "success" rate of Obamacare, which has the dubious distinction of having proved you can be insured and not have access.
The Editorial Board has no problem with making people pay for something they cannot use as long as those payments subsidize someone else. Better yet, in their view, just subsidize everyone for products they don't want.
4
@AACNY: So where's the better Republican plan?
Nedra Schneebly: NOTHING AT ALL would be better than the ACA -- NO insurance at all.
It's that bad. It charges people and then gives them no health care.
At least if I did not have to pay for my lousy, worthless Obamacare policy with the $7500 deductible....I could use the premium money ($315 a month) to pay for SOME health care.
As it is now, I cannot afford ANY health care whatsoever.
KILL THE ACA NOW! it is evil. It must die.
It's that bad. It charges people and then gives them no health care.
At least if I did not have to pay for my lousy, worthless Obamacare policy with the $7500 deductible....I could use the premium money ($315 a month) to pay for SOME health care.
As it is now, I cannot afford ANY health care whatsoever.
KILL THE ACA NOW! it is evil. It must die.
Usually the Times editors are level-headed in their analyses of health care... but this editorial misses an obvious point. While it is true today that "Obamacare is NOT collapsing or imploding", it is abundantly clear based on the evidence presented in this op ed piece that the GOP's desire to MAKE Obamacare collapse and implode will be realized by their unwillingness to fix the law by providing the funds needed at the State and Federal level.... and also clear that if it is NOT fixed in the short term it will collapse and implode...
1
Only in the Editorial's Board's bubble of denial could Obamacare be considered to be working well. True to form, when it comes to blame, it all falls on the insurance companies (poorly designed "mandated" policies) or inadequate spending (not enough subsidies).
Only in the bubble could insurers' profitability be considered a success factor. And only in the bubble could the fact that healthy young people chose not to buy something they didn't want (Obamacare benefits) at prices they couldn't afford not be considered a fatal flaw.
And true to form, the Editorial Board -- like all democrats in denial -- completely ignores the fact that Americans are incensed about having their "choice" removed.
One wonders whom the Editorial Board blames for the $100 billion the federal government spent on the Medicaid *expansion* and doubling of fraud under Obama's loosened eligibility requirements.
Talk about blinded by rage. The denial about Obamacare continues to run deep and thick.
Only in the bubble could insurers' profitability be considered a success factor. And only in the bubble could the fact that healthy young people chose not to buy something they didn't want (Obamacare benefits) at prices they couldn't afford not be considered a fatal flaw.
And true to form, the Editorial Board -- like all democrats in denial -- completely ignores the fact that Americans are incensed about having their "choice" removed.
One wonders whom the Editorial Board blames for the $100 billion the federal government spent on the Medicaid *expansion* and doubling of fraud under Obama's loosened eligibility requirements.
Talk about blinded by rage. The denial about Obamacare continues to run deep and thick.
3
and we're still stunned that trump won the election!!??
here's the times behaving like both parties, announcing "health care" and instead, selling insurance.
it was in large part the swing of the left away from the "general Welfare" toward the "special Interest,"
if you will, that sent baskets of deplorables in trump's direction when they heard "draining the swamp" and "no one is listening to your voices" from the campaign mill.
even though a trump vote can be seen as "against the interests" of those voters, the promise of change, especially in health care, and maybe better roads and bridges, was enough, given the behavior of the complacent lot that took over the party of the people.
if health care is the issue, let's just get it done, "medicare for all" is the description that best fits...start tomorrow...every one pays, everyone joins, then tweak and tweak and tweak, but at least no one left without care while a privileged lot of slackers "debates" or declines to debate an issue of life or death.
here's the times behaving like both parties, announcing "health care" and instead, selling insurance.
it was in large part the swing of the left away from the "general Welfare" toward the "special Interest,"
if you will, that sent baskets of deplorables in trump's direction when they heard "draining the swamp" and "no one is listening to your voices" from the campaign mill.
even though a trump vote can be seen as "against the interests" of those voters, the promise of change, especially in health care, and maybe better roads and bridges, was enough, given the behavior of the complacent lot that took over the party of the people.
if health care is the issue, let's just get it done, "medicare for all" is the description that best fits...start tomorrow...every one pays, everyone joins, then tweak and tweak and tweak, but at least no one left without care while a privileged lot of slackers "debates" or declines to debate an issue of life or death.
2
Ah, the power of the GOP to make a racket like Obamacare look good.
Affordable? - $1400 a month for a 12k decuctible?
Care? - yes, indeed - if you are an executive for Aetna
The US Health Care Racket is alive and well. Can't say the same for many millions of Americans stuck in this awful for-profit system.
Affordable? - $1400 a month for a 12k decuctible?
Care? - yes, indeed - if you are an executive for Aetna
The US Health Care Racket is alive and well. Can't say the same for many millions of Americans stuck in this awful for-profit system.
3
It's simple math that you put more people into the pool and you spread out the costs. ( That is the whole basis for Single Payer ~ everyone pays something )
The ACA ( Obama\Cares ) can be easily fixed by adding more paying people into the pool\spreading out the costs and to add a government backstopped public option. ( of course in lieu of Single Payer )
Single Payer is going to happen ( any state can implement it now ). It is just a matter of how many people will get hurt, go bankrupt or die from now until that moment when the U.S. joins the rest of the industrialized world.
Whatever plan that republicans come up with now, is not about health care. It is about having no regulation at all and for government to not be in the business of redistributing wealth, but rather socializing profit to those at the top.
Enough to make one sick.
The ACA ( Obama\Cares ) can be easily fixed by adding more paying people into the pool\spreading out the costs and to add a government backstopped public option. ( of course in lieu of Single Payer )
Single Payer is going to happen ( any state can implement it now ). It is just a matter of how many people will get hurt, go bankrupt or die from now until that moment when the U.S. joins the rest of the industrialized world.
Whatever plan that republicans come up with now, is not about health care. It is about having no regulation at all and for government to not be in the business of redistributing wealth, but rather socializing profit to those at the top.
Enough to make one sick.
3
"It is about having no regulation at all and for government to not be in the business of redistributing wealth, but rather socializing profit to those at the top."
That's reason enough to get the federal government out of the health care business.
That's reason enough to get the federal government out of the health care business.
2
President Trump is trying his level best to eviscerate the ACA for one reason and one reason only -- to "prove" he was right all along and ACA was a failure.
Through Trump's blind rage, he fails to see that the BCRA would cause millions of his own diehard supporters to suffer, be financially ruined, become homelessness and countless would die. Experts agree that those in rural communities, the majority of which jumped on the Trump Train, the result of TrumpCare would be particularly devastating.
Mitch McConnell, on the other hand, could care less about the people. His own state of Kentucky has relied heavily on the ACA, and those people would face grave harm if Trumpcare passed.
Mitch and his cronies are not acting to prove themselves right as Trump is struggling to do. The GOP leadership in Congress simply wants to give huge tax breaks to their wealthy campaign contributors and the powerful special interest groups that keep their re-election coffers full.
The ACA has worked for tens of millions of Americans. Even with all of the arrows flighted at it by Trump and Congress, it's still the best option for those who need individual insurance. Congress must fix the loop holes and move on!
50% - 80% of all medical bills contain errors.
Over 50% of insurance claim denials are wrong.
We are getting price gouged by pharma and medical device companies.
Hospital are fraudulently overfilling patients, costing us tens of billions of dollars.
Fix this, Congress!
Through Trump's blind rage, he fails to see that the BCRA would cause millions of his own diehard supporters to suffer, be financially ruined, become homelessness and countless would die. Experts agree that those in rural communities, the majority of which jumped on the Trump Train, the result of TrumpCare would be particularly devastating.
Mitch McConnell, on the other hand, could care less about the people. His own state of Kentucky has relied heavily on the ACA, and those people would face grave harm if Trumpcare passed.
Mitch and his cronies are not acting to prove themselves right as Trump is struggling to do. The GOP leadership in Congress simply wants to give huge tax breaks to their wealthy campaign contributors and the powerful special interest groups that keep their re-election coffers full.
The ACA has worked for tens of millions of Americans. Even with all of the arrows flighted at it by Trump and Congress, it's still the best option for those who need individual insurance. Congress must fix the loop holes and move on!
50% - 80% of all medical bills contain errors.
Over 50% of insurance claim denials are wrong.
We are getting price gouged by pharma and medical device companies.
Hospital are fraudulently overfilling patients, costing us tens of billions of dollars.
Fix this, Congress!
3
"President Trump is trying his level best to eviscerate the ACA for one reason and one reason only -- to "prove" he was right all along and ACA was a failure."
You give way too much credit to Trump. He is clueless about the ACA and pretty much everything else when it comes to being Chief Executive. He famously said in an interview that his health care plan would cover everyone and that government would pay for it. So, where is this plan?
You give way too much credit to Trump. He is clueless about the ACA and pretty much everything else when it comes to being Chief Executive. He famously said in an interview that his health care plan would cover everyone and that government would pay for it. So, where is this plan?
It's not collapsing. imploding or exploding?? Whew...now I feel better, except for the little fact that my premiums have quadrupled over the last 6 or 7 years along with a deductible that I can get close too unless I am on death's door.
2
Republicans are like a poor magician trying to distract people with outlier claims that the Affordable Care Act is blowing up: it isn't. When their dreadful plan is voted down or does not even make it to a vote, then it will be time to work with Democrats on fixing things.Figure out a way to incentivize young people to want to purchase insurance not opt out and add more to subsidies to bring down deductibles.Does that mean that we should ask the top one or two percent to pay more in tax so that more people can be covered for healthcare? Yes. Consider the alternative Republicans: Single Payer.
3
The folks who are commenting here about how the ACA doesn't work for them or self-employed or small business people are providing important input and information.
Unfortunately they are missing the real point of the Republican quest to repeal the ACA.
This is not about health care.
What Republicans want is to ensure tax cuts for their oligarch masters while at the same time destroying the legacy of that black fellow who had the temerity to believe that because he was elected he had the right to be President.
Unfortunately they are missing the real point of the Republican quest to repeal the ACA.
This is not about health care.
What Republicans want is to ensure tax cuts for their oligarch masters while at the same time destroying the legacy of that black fellow who had the temerity to believe that because he was elected he had the right to be President.
2
On what evidence do the writers believe that "safeguarding the health of their constituents" has ever crossed the Republicans' "minds?." Any fool who has been paying attention realized years ago that the Republicans see health insurance & care exactly the way they see every other issue: as a means to manipulate their base politically and reward the wealthy financially. Will you never get tired of maintaining the charade?
2
The ACA was conceived with rickety legs and the carpenters in charge seemed to sometimes have a desire to make those legs even more rickety via neglect or active sabotage. More on that later.
But at least the ACA provided a much needed stool of sorts; a stool a lot of people used to finally rest and recover their weary bodies and minds; people that had nowhere to rest before the ACA.
As the article honestly said, "The A.C.A. is not perfect, but its problems are fixable." But Americans don't look for the fix soon.
First you have the D leaders cowardly or immorally lukewarm about proclaiming that government-guaranteed health coverage for everyone is a citizen's right for fear of losing a few swing votes or offending some donor.
Second you have most of the R voters irrationally pathologically opposed to the very idea of such a thing (as long as they personally are protected via employers or government - oh the irony of it all).
Third you have the core of the R Party fully committed to establishing a Nation more designed for aristocrats and Southern Gentlemen than the People - if it ain't a problem for them it ain't a problem!
So you get things like the UNNECESSARY collapse of the nonprofit insurance Co-ops. The Obama Administration too scared to throw much weight at a problem because of the negative arrows it would receive for suggesting money get spent on the People and you have the Rs committed to actually undermining any hope of fixing the problem. Pitiful.
But at least the ACA provided a much needed stool of sorts; a stool a lot of people used to finally rest and recover their weary bodies and minds; people that had nowhere to rest before the ACA.
As the article honestly said, "The A.C.A. is not perfect, but its problems are fixable." But Americans don't look for the fix soon.
First you have the D leaders cowardly or immorally lukewarm about proclaiming that government-guaranteed health coverage for everyone is a citizen's right for fear of losing a few swing votes or offending some donor.
Second you have most of the R voters irrationally pathologically opposed to the very idea of such a thing (as long as they personally are protected via employers or government - oh the irony of it all).
Third you have the core of the R Party fully committed to establishing a Nation more designed for aristocrats and Southern Gentlemen than the People - if it ain't a problem for them it ain't a problem!
So you get things like the UNNECESSARY collapse of the nonprofit insurance Co-ops. The Obama Administration too scared to throw much weight at a problem because of the negative arrows it would receive for suggesting money get spent on the People and you have the Rs committed to actually undermining any hope of fixing the problem. Pitiful.
2
The steady flow of cash from health insurance companies to senators (McConnell!) and congressmen (Ryan!) helps us predict the future: a big profit increase for insurers, baked into the bill already in McConnell's and Ryan's desk drawers. We are now witnessing the GOP distraction circus, throwing a lot of dust into the air, which will continue until late August/early September.
At that time, a government shutdown will be just around the corner, but the Senate will be forced by their reconciliation procedure to finish or abandon the health insurance bill before they deal with the budget. Then we will hear cries of alarm: "Vote now! Fix it later! Prevent the government shutdown!"
Game over, score: Oligarchs 1, voters 0.
At that time, a government shutdown will be just around the corner, but the Senate will be forced by their reconciliation procedure to finish or abandon the health insurance bill before they deal with the budget. Then we will hear cries of alarm: "Vote now! Fix it later! Prevent the government shutdown!"
Game over, score: Oligarchs 1, voters 0.
2
The NY Times editors are living in denial. Jon Stewart, formerly of "The Daily Show" put it correctly when he said the people who he knew who voted for Trump were not afraid of immigrants, terrorists, etc., but afraid of their astronomical ACA co-pays and deductibles. But of course, the members of the editorial board are surely in the income bracket of those who can afford Obamacare, unlike much of the rest of the country.
The move to save the "unAffordable Care Act"" is a futile diversion. The Democrats want to push it, because (1) their corporate owners don't want Medicare-for-All or single payer, as they'd lose all the unjustifiable profit they are now making, and (2) they don't want to admit that their original sell out to corporate insurance companies and medical suppliers was a huge mistake, and is backfiring on them now.
Once again, they elite corporate Democrats are being disingenuous hypocrites, as evidenced by Pelosi and Feinstein getting up in front of constituents, and lying about the program in California, with the Dem state senate leader blocking an overwhelmingly supported single payer going forward.
So let's not save the unsavable. It's far past time for single payer in the United States. Many other western democracies do it successfully. It is only in America that greed rules to such an extent that our medical payment system is cruel and deadly. And that is because of our corporate duopoly political parties--the Republicans AND Democrats.
The move to save the "unAffordable Care Act"" is a futile diversion. The Democrats want to push it, because (1) their corporate owners don't want Medicare-for-All or single payer, as they'd lose all the unjustifiable profit they are now making, and (2) they don't want to admit that their original sell out to corporate insurance companies and medical suppliers was a huge mistake, and is backfiring on them now.
Once again, they elite corporate Democrats are being disingenuous hypocrites, as evidenced by Pelosi and Feinstein getting up in front of constituents, and lying about the program in California, with the Dem state senate leader blocking an overwhelmingly supported single payer going forward.
So let's not save the unsavable. It's far past time for single payer in the United States. Many other western democracies do it successfully. It is only in America that greed rules to such an extent that our medical payment system is cruel and deadly. And that is because of our corporate duopoly political parties--the Republicans AND Democrats.
2
The motivation for the Republicans varies from Rand Paul and his extreme libertarianism, which accepts that many poor will suffer and die, to McConnell, who simply wants to win and obliterate anything Obama did, to the others who simply want to reduce the tax burden on the wealthy. Racism and resentment is a common ingredient, which is how they sell this unsavory stew to the people who voted them in.
Where are the democrats with a list of fixes they suggest to repair and not replace? They should be out there every day discussing how their fixes will stabilize the markets and bring prices down
This is their opportunity to be the sane voice of reason and they are silent.
Where are Chuck and Nancy's proposals?
This is their opportunity to be the sane voice of reason and they are silent.
Where are Chuck and Nancy's proposals?
1
Here was a Democrat out there every day with a list of proposed fixes, but all anyone ever asked her about was email
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/health-care/
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/health-care/
2
McConnell's "blindness against Obamacare" results from the blinders he put on against Obama before he ever assumed the presidency McConnell promised would last only one term. Because of his refusal to remove the blinders and see Obama as President---witness McConnell's action on the Supreme Court--this "leader" is leading his sheep into a ditch. Let's hope some of his colleagues have the good sense not to join the others and work to improve the access to health that we all need.
1
The last sentence says it all --- the utter hatred for anything remotely attached to former president Obama is the total key for understanding this insane rush by republicans to destroy health care in this country.
They should be held accountable for this at the polls.
They should be held accountable for this at the polls.
Your dear beloved Obama put out a rotten product. A lot of Americans are unhappy with it not because of his race or party or because they want to "destroy the country", but because THEIR HEALTH INSURANCE COSTS SKYROCKETED.
Liberal narcissistic thinking brings everything back to their own ideology -- and the audacity of its challengers -- when it usually has nothing at all to do with it and everything to do with everyday people's daily lives.
Liberal narcissistic thinking brings everything back to their own ideology -- and the audacity of its challengers -- when it usually has nothing at all to do with it and everything to do with everyday people's daily lives.
4
Working? I'm paying $6,000 out of pocket, I gave up one of my meds when it reached $100 a bottle.
I used to have an HMO before ObamaCare. I work for a living, but my insurance is letting me die in pain.
I used to have an HMO before ObamaCare. I work for a living, but my insurance is letting me die in pain.
4
Almost got right...but its not Obamacare that they are in a blind rage about,,,its Obama that they are enraged about.
" But Mr. McConnell and his party have become so blinded by their rage against Obamacare that they are losing sight of what ought to be their goal: safeguarding the health of their constituents."
" But Mr. McConnell and his party have become so blinded by their rage against Obamacare that they are losing sight of what ought to be their goal: safeguarding the health of their constituents."
1
The ACA's biggest flaw is that there was no clause included which immunizes it from the presence of the Republican Party.
Doctors are still awaiting a cure for this disease.
Doctors are still awaiting a cure for this disease.
Plainly and above all else, Republicans care about WEALTH and not about HEALTH. A demented grandmother in a nursing home neither contributes to their campaign nor votes. With their fingers in their ears they cannot hear the message of the gospel of Matthew: "What you did not do to the least of these, you did not do to me."
The prime directive for the Republicans is remaining in office even if they must do it standing on the backs of the poor, disabled and elderly. Shame!
The prime directive for the Republicans is remaining in office even if they must do it standing on the backs of the poor, disabled and elderly. Shame!
1
Some people have said that the Repubs hated the ACA because it carried Obama's name. The Republicans have hated any social welfare program for decades. They hate Social Security, they hate Medicare, and they hate Medicaid. If they could kill them all without taking a political hit, they would.
The fact that the ACA was passed by the first African-American President only fuelled their level of hatred and they saw an opportunity to tie the program to him to stir up their base base (not a typo). Remember it was the Repubs who came up with the moniker "Obamacare".
The fact that the ACA was passed by the first African-American President only fuelled their level of hatred and they saw an opportunity to tie the program to him to stir up their base base (not a typo). Remember it was the Repubs who came up with the moniker "Obamacare".
The ACA (Obama) is plodding along and surviving, but it is quickly destroying the soul of America. Read the Declaration of Independence and why America was created. The ACA is essentially a crematorium for our core values and why people enjoy being American. Government destroys societies.
2
U R RIGHT. Obamacare never got going.
I spoke to 4 new Obamacare patients. Each did not know what a deductible was & each had a deductible greater than than his/her net worth.
I spoke to 4 new Obamacare patients. Each did not know what a deductible was & each had a deductible greater than than his/her net worth.
1
The headline in the Indianapolis Star read, "Indiana GOP asked Facebook for Obamacare horror stories. The responses were surprising." Indeed, as the majority of responses were positive about the ACA if not without criticisms and suggestions for improvements abut the program. This in pretty conservative Indiana and home of of its conservative in chief, VP Mike Pence.
Hardly fake news this piece. In fact, just about the only fake news out there is being disseminated by the once and future wreckers of Obamacare. They certainly can't be happy about being shot in the foot by their Hoosier GOP. The wreckers could be made even more miserable if they still end up sticking their folly to their own base.
http://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2017/07/04/indiana-gop-asked...
Hardly fake news this piece. In fact, just about the only fake news out there is being disseminated by the once and future wreckers of Obamacare. They certainly can't be happy about being shot in the foot by their Hoosier GOP. The wreckers could be made even more miserable if they still end up sticking their folly to their own base.
http://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2017/07/04/indiana-gop-asked...
Are there clauses within ObamaCare that prevents additional measures being implemented; you have to amend the constitution or something? Didn't believe so.
IOWs, wouldn't it be a lot cheaper, easier, quicker,...Psst more efficient to just improve what's there?
IOWs, wouldn't it be a lot cheaper, easier, quicker,...Psst more efficient to just improve what's there?
1
The ACA will die from neglect as the GOP tries to find a way to peddle the notion that they have a replacement, and the Democrats dream of single payer.
And people will die.
Fix the ACA. Reduce stupid regulations. Add a few helpful ones, like making the insurance companies render clear copays, deductibles and what deductibles cover on their websites. Give people - the ones who always get burnt by government programs because they are too rich for help and too poor to afford the price - real subsidies and relief. Get everyone on a plan.
Then get real about cost. Regulate monopolized markets. Reduce the incentive for drug companies to sell really expensive drugs. Reduce the incentives for hospitals to create networks of over-priced services through vertical integration. Put the public option back on the table to pressure insurers, and make sure that the rates for healthy are competitive. And make sure copays make sense. A person should not have to pay $50 per visit for an ongoing problem which must be monitored, like an infection, which causes them to not return because they cannot buy groceries.
And hold out the real threat of single payer, in which everyone in the profit market stands to lose something, as the stick that will keep people in line.
The job of government is not to allocate resources to benefit a few and harm millions. We shouldn't be working to become the poster child for the term "banana republic."
And people will die.
Fix the ACA. Reduce stupid regulations. Add a few helpful ones, like making the insurance companies render clear copays, deductibles and what deductibles cover on their websites. Give people - the ones who always get burnt by government programs because they are too rich for help and too poor to afford the price - real subsidies and relief. Get everyone on a plan.
Then get real about cost. Regulate monopolized markets. Reduce the incentive for drug companies to sell really expensive drugs. Reduce the incentives for hospitals to create networks of over-priced services through vertical integration. Put the public option back on the table to pressure insurers, and make sure that the rates for healthy are competitive. And make sure copays make sense. A person should not have to pay $50 per visit for an ongoing problem which must be monitored, like an infection, which causes them to not return because they cannot buy groceries.
And hold out the real threat of single payer, in which everyone in the profit market stands to lose something, as the stick that will keep people in line.
The job of government is not to allocate resources to benefit a few and harm millions. We shouldn't be working to become the poster child for the term "banana republic."
191
Doctors charge too much, in my layman's opinion, but my former doctor in rural Texas claimed that he made around 50k/annually. He did live in a modest house. Many of his patients were on Medicare.
"A person should not have to pay $50 per visit for an ongoing problem which must be monitored, like an infection, which causes them to not return because they cannot buy groceries."
Good point, but how do you make doctors, supposedly free agents, charge what the government wants them to without trampling on their rights as independent suppliers of medical services. Some doctors are no doubt gouging their patients, but others are struggling to pay overhead, and they might like to retire before they die in harness. Being a medical doctor seems very stressful for most of them; they age quickly.
----------------------------------
You said: "Reduce stupid regulations." Well, yes, but which ones exactly and how? Often "stupid" regulations have a raison d'etre -- because once you know the full story, the regulations aren't so stupid.
But thank you for focusing on this critical issue. Your comment is very good and inspires communication and thought. Thanks again!
"A person should not have to pay $50 per visit for an ongoing problem which must be monitored, like an infection, which causes them to not return because they cannot buy groceries."
Good point, but how do you make doctors, supposedly free agents, charge what the government wants them to without trampling on their rights as independent suppliers of medical services. Some doctors are no doubt gouging their patients, but others are struggling to pay overhead, and they might like to retire before they die in harness. Being a medical doctor seems very stressful for most of them; they age quickly.
----------------------------------
You said: "Reduce stupid regulations." Well, yes, but which ones exactly and how? Often "stupid" regulations have a raison d'etre -- because once you know the full story, the regulations aren't so stupid.
But thank you for focusing on this critical issue. Your comment is very good and inspires communication and thought. Thanks again!
"The ACA will die from neglect as the GOP tries to find a way to peddle the notion that they have a replacement, and the Democrats dream of single payer. And people will die."
News flash - people will die every day, with or without a health care plan, regardless of who supplies it. How many people have died even though they were covered by the ACA?
News flash - people will die every day, with or without a health care plan, regardless of who supplies it. How many people have died even though they were covered by the ACA?
Vertical integration has hit my small city with a vengeance since our local hospital was bought by a large TX chain. Our costs have SOARED outrageously while our access to care has diminished at the same time. The exodus of medical professionals - doctors, nurses, techs, etc. - has been constant and frightening in its rapidity while this behemoth gets "efficient" to "better serve us." Right... If I cannot be seen, I cannot be served.
The one saving grace, maybe, is that a competing regional hospital is under construction as I type. Its November opening cannot come soon enough.
The one saving grace, maybe, is that a competing regional hospital is under construction as I type. Its November opening cannot come soon enough.
The GOP controls both houses of Congress and the WH. If the ACA implodes it is on their watch!
It is both frightening and sad that they continually miss this critical point- or prefer to lie about it.
It is both frightening and sad that they continually miss this critical point- or prefer to lie about it.
2
Yes Single-Payer is the Answer but unfortunately it Ain't the Solution in our lifetimes.
Our government (be it Left-Ind-Right) isn't getting rid of a 1/2 Trillion $$ industry, for something that's a lot more efficient, covers all, and is cheaper:):).
Our government (be it Left-Ind-Right) isn't getting rid of a 1/2 Trillion $$ industry, for something that's a lot more efficient, covers all, and is cheaper:):).
7
Yeah, they all have their hands in the pot. Especially the Republicans. At least the Democrats are concerned about what would happen to the country if there would be a massive die-off of old, ill, and handicapped people. Already this bill by the Republicans is prepared to empty the pockets of any middle class people who so much as sneeze. God help the parents who have children with asthma or allergies.
1
Why Republicans hate Obamacare:
1. It is relatively successful.
2. It has provided health insurance to millions in the red states very successfully.
3. It has president Obama's name, a black man who was two term president without a single scandal.
4. Trump and some of his side kicks are racists and want to erase the history made by Obama,a black man.
5. The ACA is still working despite Republican sledge hammer.
As a provider, as a physician in relatively affluent Connecticut, patients who have Obamacare are very grateful that they have health insurance albeit sometimes after an emergency room visit.
Repeal and replacement of Obamacare would be a plain disaster. It needs to evolve and improved like any other policy.
I can guarantee that single payer system is coming and its coming in my lifetime and I'm in my sixties.
1. It is relatively successful.
2. It has provided health insurance to millions in the red states very successfully.
3. It has president Obama's name, a black man who was two term president without a single scandal.
4. Trump and some of his side kicks are racists and want to erase the history made by Obama,a black man.
5. The ACA is still working despite Republican sledge hammer.
As a provider, as a physician in relatively affluent Connecticut, patients who have Obamacare are very grateful that they have health insurance albeit sometimes after an emergency room visit.
Repeal and replacement of Obamacare would be a plain disaster. It needs to evolve and improved like any other policy.
I can guarantee that single payer system is coming and its coming in my lifetime and I'm in my sixties.
414
Yes, single payer is coming and Doctor, you will not longer set the price for your services.
I'm in my sixties too, live in CT, and have insurance thanks to Obamacare. Because of the deductible, I still can't afford health care - like another $1,000-$1,200 for a colonoscopy. I hope not to see you in the emergency room, but I can't afford to see you in your office. How soon can I expect that universal single payer? You might live to see it, but the odds aren't as good that I will.
1
Good and accurate points.
Also, Repubs fear and loathe a successful system created by their mortal enemies, the Democrats. If the Dems look good, the Repubs are hurt politically by that much; and the name of the game is to be re-elected because being out of power is a fate worse than death to a politician. Helping constituents is a low priority; it's just one of the necessary steps on the way to power. For many politicians, politics is but a game; but I admit that sincere public servants do exist: Barack Obama for one. Joe Biden is another. Bernie Sanders is a third.
Also, Repubs fear and loathe a successful system created by their mortal enemies, the Democrats. If the Dems look good, the Repubs are hurt politically by that much; and the name of the game is to be re-elected because being out of power is a fate worse than death to a politician. Helping constituents is a low priority; it's just one of the necessary steps on the way to power. For many politicians, politics is but a game; but I admit that sincere public servants do exist: Barack Obama for one. Joe Biden is another. Bernie Sanders is a third.
1
The main complaint about US health insurance is that it's too expensive and the old men in office are doing nothing, nada, zero, and zilch to address the costs. For-profit health care will never work for anyone except the health insurance industry.
16
Please leave your big city and investigate how the ACA is failing miserably in much of America. I live in a picturesque, historic town about 75 miles from 2 larger cities. Yet the two ACA plans offered in my county do not cover our fine our local hospital or any of our hunfreds of doctors, all employed by the hospital. Available policies have seen prices explode and only provide coverage in the larger towns more than an hour's drive away. They also provide no coverage outside those cities meaning our college children are uncovered when at school. As a result the choice is buy expensive, high-deductible ACA insurance that is useless or be fined? I have friends with similar stories scattered throughout the Midwest & South, The ACA is collapsing...you just never visit the areas it is occurring, or talk to the non-Medicaid victims forced to deal with it. I can keep my doctor, period? Please.
42
Did you read the reasons why?
But insurance markets in some states, like Arizona, Iowa and Tennessee, remain fragile, and few insurers are willing to sell policies there. There are several reasons. It is harder to do business in rural areas where there are few customers and fewer providers. Insurers fear that the Trump administration will make good on the president’s threats to stop making subsidy payments. And in some places, a few very sick and very expensive patients have driven up the cost of insurance.
But insurance markets in some states, like Arizona, Iowa and Tennessee, remain fragile, and few insurers are willing to sell policies there. There are several reasons. It is harder to do business in rural areas where there are few customers and fewer providers. Insurers fear that the Trump administration will make good on the president’s threats to stop making subsidy payments. And in some places, a few very sick and very expensive patients have driven up the cost of insurance.
1
While there aren't great choices in some rural area, the answer isn't to completely repeal ACA but to see where the problems are and fix them.
Repealing ACA would make your predicament worse.
Repealing ACA would make your predicament worse.
3
Actually, you have it backwards, your ACA plans would cover your local hospital and doctors IF they would accept the plans. Plans are not designed to refuse doctors, but doctors and hospitals are free to refuse plans.
In many rural areas, low service areas with small populations, without the ACA there would be no hospital, and fewer doctors. So your problem as described may have more to do with your state government and it's regulation of the ACA than the ACA itself.
In many rural areas, low service areas with small populations, without the ACA there would be no hospital, and fewer doctors. So your problem as described may have more to do with your state government and it's regulation of the ACA than the ACA itself.
3
Is it the Affordable Care Act or Insurance Company Protection for Profits Act? Democrats have yielded this discussion to the Republicans, and are paying a heavy cost for it. The Constitution includes no provision guaranteeing profits to insurance companies. If they do not wish to provide this coverage, fine, there is an alternative that provides better coverage for less money, the single payer system.
Republicans repeatedly claim that private insurance means more choices. Experience proves them wrong, as the companies have financial incentives to deny coverage, thus eliminating not enhancing choices.
Republicans repeatedly claim that private insurance means more choices. Experience proves them wrong, as the companies have financial incentives to deny coverage, thus eliminating not enhancing choices.
9
The Republican health care policy? If it's your health, why should I care?
182
Richard - You are correct and that is sad for Republicans lack of care and soul and that is indeed bad news for all of our citizens.
The world will continue to have terrible problems until we begin to love our neighbors as ourselves. Full disclosure: I don't. Most of us are mostly concerned about #1; yeah, we help some -- in fact, I'm leaving now to help out a neighbor -- but when push comes to shove, it's every man for himself. We get scared, worried: What if I can't pay my bills? Which is scary. So times are financially tough, money is short, and now the government wants more of my scarce money to pay the bills of million of strangers, strangers whom I may not like and who may not like me. It's a heavy lift morally to share what you believe you don't have to begin with. Being a real Christian, which I'm not, and sharing all you have is simply asking too much of most of us. Mother Theresa was an exception (at least according to most news releases on her; Chris Hitchens, I believe, said she was a fraud. I don't really know; I just know what I read).
My neighbor calls. Must go.
My neighbor calls. Must go.
The Democratic health care policy? It's your health, but we're getting everyone else to pay for it through coercive government.
2
The truly outrageous part of this whole situation is that McConnell will use the current Russia issue with Trump Jr. as a means of getting the votes for his bill. The Republicans are quickly realizing that the Russia collusion issue is not fake news but there is a real fire here that may bring down this administration and their chief bill signer with it. This is not good news for Americans and healthcare.
5
A modest proposal: in any locale where there are fewer than three private insurance choices in the individual market, allow people to buy into Medicare or Medicaid. They would have to pay the true cost of these plans unlike current recipients, but would still have reasonable options if the private insurers have opted out. Buying into Medicaid would be cheaper than buying in to Medicare and provide care mostly in Medicaid Clinics, but at least people would not be left out in the cold.
11
Obamacare would have succeeded if Obama had the support and the audacity to retain public option as originally planned. Republicans and some democrats who did not vote for Obamacare in the end anyway set Obamacare in motion to become unsustainable with high premiums and high deductibles as well as a very highly significant and continuously escalating propping from tax payer revenues. The health insurance lobby with its greed to capture a committed source of its income coming from tax payers killed the public option and jeopardized the long term survival of the complex universal heath care system aka Obamcare, or ACA. Now what is the Republican health plan due to be released today for consideration? If it is not a better replacement it will not pass and leave Obamacare in place with the props that will keep it limping along.
3
like a error in sighting an arrow, an apparently small error at the bow leads to a miss by a mlle at the target...dems have only themselves to blame for letting obama's failure of "audacity" disturb their aim...what we got for it, to switch metaphors, is a crumbling system with plenty of room for the republicans to rope-a-dope reform until it collapses from fatigue.
One of the big problems has been the unwillingness to tackle costs. I can buy a cholesterol medication for $300 per year from Canada. It costs $2,000 in the U.S. Lower costs equals lower premiums equals more people covered.
10
The entire debate surrounding the ACA is solely focused on the 20 million people who may lose their insurance. While that may be true, it is also true that medicaid was expanded to cover people that it shouldn't. One in four Americans are now covered by medicaid.
3
Exactly what kind of people "shouldn't be covered"? Everyone deserves to have health care. Make it a universal program and get rid of for-profit insurance companies jacking up the costs. Take profit out of health care and it gets a whole lot better. Oh, but excuse me, you live in the land of the free where people a free to die because they don't deserve health care. How can that possibly be?
1
@Dan
You might not be so cavalier if you were one of the 22 MILLION! Americans who stand to lose their health insurance.
You might not be so cavalier if you were one of the 22 MILLION! Americans who stand to lose their health insurance.
1
The real problem with Obamacare is that it screwed up insurance for everyone, particularly in rural areas and those buying individual plans, so that 10 million could go on the exchanges and get subsidized insurance.
The reason so much demagoguing is taking place around Medicaid cuts is to obscure the fact that Obamacare opened up Medicaid to non-disabled working-age Americans, and they're receiving more generous benefits than disabled Americans.
Also, when have you known big government proponents openly admit that a reduction in the growth rate isn't actually a "cut" in benefits? Welcome to the disingenuous coverage of Medicaid *expansion*.
The reason so much demagoguing is taking place around Medicaid cuts is to obscure the fact that Obamacare opened up Medicaid to non-disabled working-age Americans, and they're receiving more generous benefits than disabled Americans.
Also, when have you known big government proponents openly admit that a reduction in the growth rate isn't actually a "cut" in benefits? Welcome to the disingenuous coverage of Medicaid *expansion*.
2
The ACA is not working well when the premiums and deductibles are so onerous for so many families. That needs to be fixed.
3
Premiums and deductibles were onerous BEFORE the ACA; the changes to the medical marketplace are increasing less rapidly than they were before the ACA was put in place. One problem is that people did not pay attention to what their premiums were before ACA if they were paid by their employer. Now, because employers are passing on more of the costs to their employees, people are paying more attention. I worked for a major foundation connected to a major state university shortly before ACA went into effect. When I asked what the cost of my insurance was to the foundation, in addition to my monthly cost, the personnel person told me that I was the first person who had ever asked and she would have to look it up! This entire insurance group had thousands of employees. People just do not pay attention if it does not seem to come out of their pocket directly. Employers figured out that they can pass more of the cost on to their employees, with or without ACA, and that is what they are doing in many cases. The health insurance companies are making out like bandits. They have been raising costs for years and years, exponentially since Ronald Reagan passed the tax bill that allowed health insurance to be a for profit business.
It is reprehensible that in the year 2017, fighting over health care coverage still continues, when you consider that we are the only Western Country without it. Israel was the last Western country to implement it in in 1996, 21 years ago!
Fact 1: We pay the most per person for health care of all the Western Countries.
Fact 2: We rate in the bottom of our general health among all Western Countries and many third world countries. Infant mortality is a disaster!
Simply put, our health care is the most expensive and a dismal failure. Yet the fight goes on; believe it or not starting, during the Truman administration post WW2.
Why aren't we on a single payer system with cradle to grave coverage?
Greed! The insurance and pharmaceutical industries have had their hands in the pocket of our congress for generations.
As Trump said, health care is a complicated issue, true yet mobilizing a military to fight in WW2 was equally complicated, and it was done. The U.S. had the intelligence, manpower and resources to accomplish it. Landing a man on the moon was equally complicated. You get the point.
True, our taxes would have to increase to support a single payer system, yet ultimately the savings would be enormous as health care costs would finally be controlled; from the ridiculously expensive, to fair and reasonable. It already works with medicare.
I'm a Physician practicing for 30+ years. My colleagues and I have watched this show for years. It's time we enter the 21st century.
Fact 1: We pay the most per person for health care of all the Western Countries.
Fact 2: We rate in the bottom of our general health among all Western Countries and many third world countries. Infant mortality is a disaster!
Simply put, our health care is the most expensive and a dismal failure. Yet the fight goes on; believe it or not starting, during the Truman administration post WW2.
Why aren't we on a single payer system with cradle to grave coverage?
Greed! The insurance and pharmaceutical industries have had their hands in the pocket of our congress for generations.
As Trump said, health care is a complicated issue, true yet mobilizing a military to fight in WW2 was equally complicated, and it was done. The U.S. had the intelligence, manpower and resources to accomplish it. Landing a man on the moon was equally complicated. You get the point.
True, our taxes would have to increase to support a single payer system, yet ultimately the savings would be enormous as health care costs would finally be controlled; from the ridiculously expensive, to fair and reasonable. It already works with medicare.
I'm a Physician practicing for 30+ years. My colleagues and I have watched this show for years. It's time we enter the 21st century.
33
I've said it before and I'll say it again. We should have in the United States a single-payer system similar to what is found in many countries in Europe. Costs and healthcare risks could be more effectively managed if spread over the entire U.S. population of 310 million people. The entire private health insurance industry in the U.S. should be scrapped, as it exists primarily to make insurance executives and shareholders richer than they already are.
11
Lost in all the coverage of repeal/repeal-replace is the fact that we would not be debating the matter at all if President Obama and the Democratic party had not enacted ACA in the first place. Polling numbers show that people appreciate ACA's enormous benefits and want it improved, not torpedoed. The GOP would not have attempted to solve this profound public health problem in a thousand years. Remember that.
32
The biggest lie told in this editorial is that Obamacare is not collapsing. How can you in good conscience make the statement that the ACA is not imploding? Premiums and deductibles are skyrocketing, insurers are dropping out of the marketplaces and the subsidies used to stabilize the marketplaces are unconstitutional. Other than that, the ACA is doing great.
8
Please stop parroting the ridiculous hyperbole of the GOP. Premiums are not "skyrocketing". Premiums have been increasing at a slower rate than before the ACA.
With regards to insurers leaving the marketplace, the article addressed that. The cause has been a combination of: insufficient subsidies, people signing up who hadn't been able to previously get insurance and needed more care than average in the early years, and (a recent large contributor) the massive uncertainty injected by GOP promises to destroy the whole thing.
It's amazing that the GOP destabilizes the market with crippling uncertainty, and then they turn around and blame it on the ACA. Definitely worthy of a slow clap if it wasn't for the terrible consequences to the health of Americans.
With regards to insurers leaving the marketplace, the article addressed that. The cause has been a combination of: insufficient subsidies, people signing up who hadn't been able to previously get insurance and needed more care than average in the early years, and (a recent large contributor) the massive uncertainty injected by GOP promises to destroy the whole thing.
It's amazing that the GOP destabilizes the market with crippling uncertainty, and then they turn around and blame it on the ACA. Definitely worthy of a slow clap if it wasn't for the terrible consequences to the health of Americans.
2
So we should listen to you, your opinion on the Constitution, and Fox News instead of independant experts like Kaiser? Please...
The ACA is not perfect but I think it is better than nothing and anything the conservatives will come up with. I want health insurance that is not tied to employment. Health care costs are high because too many people do not have insurance and the cost of their medical care in emergency rooms is paid by everyone else with insurance, hence their costs are subsidized already by default. Put everyone in one pool, spread the cost between every one and subsidize those who can not pay.
7
Healthcare in America is a true oxymoron.
Everyone interested in the failings of healthcare in America, please read "An American Sickness" by Elisabeth Rosenthal. Since the creation of Health Insurance Companies in the 1950's this unregulated industry became the golden calf. The result is that Health Insurance Companies, Hospitals, Physicians, Pharmaceuticals, Device Makers, etc. and including very strong lobbies from these groups, became parasites hosting of the American patient, the bottom line was and still remains greed. All charging astronomical sums and without further intervention this system will collapse upon itself. Sadly, the final straw is that this industry has nothing to do with healthcare or do no harm to the patient.
The ACA was a reasonable approach to one problem alone, that to make healthcare available to more Americans, within the parameters of the Legislature itself.
"Healthcare" certainly will need very serious minds (this should exclude or current Republican Congress and President) working possibly years, to address and correct all the problems with our current system. A good start would be to study how other countries have achieved universal healthcare. All Nations spend much less for healthcare with better outcomes. The bigger question is whether American greed will allow this to happen.
Everyone interested in the failings of healthcare in America, please read "An American Sickness" by Elisabeth Rosenthal. Since the creation of Health Insurance Companies in the 1950's this unregulated industry became the golden calf. The result is that Health Insurance Companies, Hospitals, Physicians, Pharmaceuticals, Device Makers, etc. and including very strong lobbies from these groups, became parasites hosting of the American patient, the bottom line was and still remains greed. All charging astronomical sums and without further intervention this system will collapse upon itself. Sadly, the final straw is that this industry has nothing to do with healthcare or do no harm to the patient.
The ACA was a reasonable approach to one problem alone, that to make healthcare available to more Americans, within the parameters of the Legislature itself.
"Healthcare" certainly will need very serious minds (this should exclude or current Republican Congress and President) working possibly years, to address and correct all the problems with our current system. A good start would be to study how other countries have achieved universal healthcare. All Nations spend much less for healthcare with better outcomes. The bigger question is whether American greed will allow this to happen.
15
If it weren't for the Rs we would be going for Single Payor like every other Industrialized country has and it works wonderfully.
5
"While there are still problems in marketplaces in some states, the A.C.A., or Obamacare, is hardly coming undone." How important are the marketplaces? A. C. A. was shrouded in secrecy and lies at its inception. Costs increased and marketplaces disappeared. It is a failing Amtrack/post office imitator.
6
A rewrite of history Gene as there were many public hearings on ACA, town hall meetings and even amendments offered by republicans that were included in ACA. There have been NO public hearings on what the Senate is cooking up currently. Now there IS a recipe for failure. Speaking of lies, here's the biggest lie to date: "We are going to repeal it and replace it with something better" said our current POTUS. Now replaced with his latest reversal "Well maybe just repeal it and replace it with something else later". More and more, the American people know they got hoodwinked. That is why 71% of Americans want ACA improved not repealed.
10
amtrak and the post office have been around for a while. they were not designed to make money but provide public services. how is that failing?
1
"The ACA was shrouded in secrecy and lies at its inception." This is in itself a falsehood. As a lengthy report on the public record in this newspaper showed last week, the ACA was passed after a lengthy (13 months!) period of public debate and amendment in Congress, including changes recommended or passed with the help of Republicans. That none of them voted for it in the end was an act of pure political spite. (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/07/10/us/republican-health-care...®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0) Obama was wrong to promise that *everyone* could keep their plan - although in fact ~95% of people insured at the time were in fact able to keep their plans if they chose - and it's hard not to believe he tried to hide that 5% to avoid uproar. On the other hand, the biggest lies about the ACA (job-killing, will collapse the economy immediately, death panels) were told by its opponents. Gene's post is an example of how whoppers told often enough become truths to those who keep repeating them.
2
Republicans have talked themselves into a steel cage with their hyperbolic denunciations of the Affordable Care Act. They cannot see a life saving compromise right in front of their noses. Joining with Democrats they could "repair" or "strengthen" the ACA, and claim to be the ones that saved affordable and accessible health insurance for everyone.
Their blindness is self inflicted. With the exception of the extreme libertarian right in their party, who would repeal everything the federal government does to ensure the people's well being, the ones that oppose Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, many Republicans would welcome an opportunity to improve, fix or strengthen the ACA.
Repealing or destroying the only plan on the table for providing everyone with affordable health care will be suicidal to the fragile mix of moderates, true conservatives and radicals that make up the GOP today.
Their blindness is self inflicted. With the exception of the extreme libertarian right in their party, who would repeal everything the federal government does to ensure the people's well being, the ones that oppose Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, many Republicans would welcome an opportunity to improve, fix or strengthen the ACA.
Repealing or destroying the only plan on the table for providing everyone with affordable health care will be suicidal to the fragile mix of moderates, true conservatives and radicals that make up the GOP today.
8
Nice try. But the facts are: ACA is down in many counties not because there are too few rural healthcare providers, but because it simply isn't profitable. Too few healthy young people sign up and far too many old, sick people DO sign up. Then there is price fixing on the part of the government saying that a premium of an old person can't be more than 3x that of a young person. While that might make older people happy and sound great, it is actuarially unsound. ACA is a giant entitlement program. Under Obama, our debt soared to nearly $20 trillion. He added more debt to this country than all other presidents...combined. You seem to fail to mention this little detail. We are headed for a Greek style meltdown even if ACA goes completely away...which it isn't. Throwing thousands more dollars at individuals every year for health insurance that many cannot use anyway due to the high deductibles will accelerate our path to a financial doomsday. Finally, as to the picture of the woman wanting universal Medicare, all we have to do is look at the struggling VA system to see America's little microcosm of universal health care. Healthcare providers stay afloat by offsetting the razor thin profits from Medicare patients with those who have private health insurance. Take away private health insurance and the whole medical model falls.
9
I believe this is pure mythology. While there are problems(fixable), the VA works well for veterans. Taiwan searched the world for the best healthcare system and determined that our U.S. medicare system worked best. Does Goodguy propose we go back to the system that existed prior to the ACA?
1
Not sure where you get your facts from... hum or do facts matter. Do you think the Kaiser folks are lying? Hum, are they part of the what I'll call the "conspiracy of fake news?" I say do some real research about the ACA, the national debt, our continued recovery from a disastrous financial crisis and some $3 trillion in unfunded expense to find 'weapons of mass destruction' in Iraq (not to mention thousands of american lives). Lots of moving parts but your posting points to a real lack of understanding.
The kind of Republican unity their obstructionist opposition to Obama and his public health addressing A.C.A had inspired then seems to have turned out to be a nightmare for the Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell who is facing a herculean task of keeping his flock together while repealing the same A.C.A; because unlike Obama's public good motivated action this time the Republican aim is to rob the common people and further enrich the wealthy through tax cuts- a treacherous act against the public.
5
I lost my union coverage 25 years ago when I changed careers. I went twenty years on hope and yoga. Now as my wife and I approach 60 we got health care with ACA. I have a relationship with my naturopathic doctor. My chiro is covered and I have some peace of mind about not devastating my family with medical expenses should a broken bone or illness befall me. Thanks Obama.
60
The ACA did not tackle the cost of service. The theory that insurance companies would restrain prices has proven false (comparing America to other countries). The next reform should address that because lower costs would mean lower taxes and then Republicans could claim the win.
7
Wonderful article that helps explain how difficult it is to give health care to everyone. Regardless of what plan everyone agrees to, it's going to be expensive. The secret is to work together and come up with the best plan possible for everyone. What a novel idea. That will of course only happen or work if BOTH parties work together to do that. Healthcare for everyone isn't a RACE; It's a Marathon. Like education in America, it really should be available to everyone, regardless of their income. Why not approach it the same way we do FREE education and pay for it out of taxes, instead of tax breaks for the rich?
6
"...helps explain how difficult it is to give health care to everyone"? The only difficulties involve American politics. How hard can it be if every civilized country on the planet figured out a solution 50 years ago?
Eric Cosh knows at least one answer because he states it at the end of his comment. But he nevertheless says that this is a difficult problem.
Eric Cosh knows at least one answer because he states it at the end of his comment. But he nevertheless says that this is a difficult problem.
A related thought about all of this.
We are always seduced by the sacred precept of Capitalist competition, that it is so beneficial that it will inevitably bring down costs.
Well, we have had health insurance companies competing for our business for decades now, hospitals and clinics competing for business, drug manufacturers competing for market-share of products and what?
We have the most expensive health care of all the top 10 nations.
If that ain't proof of price fixing and collusion, what is?
We are always seduced by the sacred precept of Capitalist competition, that it is so beneficial that it will inevitably bring down costs.
Well, we have had health insurance companies competing for our business for decades now, hospitals and clinics competing for business, drug manufacturers competing for market-share of products and what?
We have the most expensive health care of all the top 10 nations.
If that ain't proof of price fixing and collusion, what is?
14
The editorial board says “Insurers fear that the Trump administration will make good on the president’s threats to stop making subsidy payments,” but the administration may have no choice. A federal court has ruled that the subsidy payments that keep the Obamacare market functioning are unconstitutional. The Obama administration kept insurance providers in the ACA market by transferring billions of dollars from, from the Treasury to cover their losses, but a federal district court has determined that these transfers are unconstitutional. District Court Judge Rosemary Collyer ruled that the Constitution says "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.” She said “Paying [those] reimbursements without an appropriation thus violates the Constitution. Congress is the only source for such an appropriation, and no public money can be spent without one." The ruling is on hold pending appeal, but it is s unlikely the Trump Justice Department will appeal and even less likely that it will win if it does appeal.
3
So, in order for this to work congress has to do something, that is, make the appropriation. The majority party, however, seems bent on making it impossible for the ACA to work.
1
All of this discussion is irrelevant.
Around $2 billion of the early year subsidies, to protect insurers as they entered this market, were authorized in law, and required no appropriation. The remainder, around $8 billion would have required appropriation. This led to the old GOP ploy: fail to appropriate what was authorized in law.
Marco Rubio tried to burnish his personal brand, while seeking the presidential nomination, by blocking the $8 billion appropriation. He called the transfers "socialism." But Little Marco failed in two ways. First, he failed to stand up to an unqualified idiot in the primaries, just as the rest of those roughly 17 great(?) candidates on the stage failed. And second, he failed to even stop the remainder of the transfers. In response to a lawsuit by marketplace insurers, at least one court decision has said that the government must pay these amounts, as it basically made a legal promise of support to the insurers. The court decision forces federal payout, regardless of appropriation. And other pending court cases are now a certainty, forcing the further transfer of the whole $8 billion ... without appropriation.
Marco Rubio succeeded in one way, just as the rest of his GOP colleagues did. Their lies about the ACA garnered millions more votes for GOP candidates since 2010, giving us this dangerous, all-GOP government, to go along with their village idiot. Great job, GOP. Please ... Ask what you can do for your country!
Around $2 billion of the early year subsidies, to protect insurers as they entered this market, were authorized in law, and required no appropriation. The remainder, around $8 billion would have required appropriation. This led to the old GOP ploy: fail to appropriate what was authorized in law.
Marco Rubio tried to burnish his personal brand, while seeking the presidential nomination, by blocking the $8 billion appropriation. He called the transfers "socialism." But Little Marco failed in two ways. First, he failed to stand up to an unqualified idiot in the primaries, just as the rest of those roughly 17 great(?) candidates on the stage failed. And second, he failed to even stop the remainder of the transfers. In response to a lawsuit by marketplace insurers, at least one court decision has said that the government must pay these amounts, as it basically made a legal promise of support to the insurers. The court decision forces federal payout, regardless of appropriation. And other pending court cases are now a certainty, forcing the further transfer of the whole $8 billion ... without appropriation.
Marco Rubio succeeded in one way, just as the rest of his GOP colleagues did. Their lies about the ACA garnered millions more votes for GOP candidates since 2010, giving us this dangerous, all-GOP government, to go along with their village idiot. Great job, GOP. Please ... Ask what you can do for your country!
The real problem is the cost of health care in America, lobby groups for Dr's, Pharma costs, huge salaries to pharmacy executives and hospital execs. Hospitals and Dr's taking advantage of the insurance system, kickbacks to Dr's from over charging, Dr's owning their own labs and imaging centers and making money off of un-necessary tests etc. Fix these problems first. Then maybe costs for health insurance will go down.
6
My problem with the ACA is this: Say I want to leave my job, go out on my own and find affordable individual coverage that will provide me with the same coverage I have today. I am willing to pay a higher premium, and perhaps accept a higher deductible. But coverage is often not available or if it is, it is outrageously expensive and compromises your coverage. So people are tethered to their employers for want of finding affordable health care. I was self-employed from 1994-2008, and I was always able to find coverage for myself and my family simply by going to a portal and comparing multiple plans from private providers. That doesn't seem to be the case anymore
11
It is not coincidence that we feel tethered to our employers. This is the result of "public" policy regarding healthcare. A fearful and insecure population is easier to manipulate and will accept lower wages in return for perceived security. I suggest you read Noam Chomsky's latest book, "Requiem for the American Dream." In it he shows that policy is "uncorrelated with public attitudes, and closely correlated with corporate interests."
2
You have the situations reversed. For me, and the many, many others with pre-existing conditions, individual insurance just was not available, let alone affordable before the ACA. For us, there was no alternative to working for a large company with a good group policy. Before HIPAA (Health Insurance PORTABILITY and Accountability Act) we couldn’t even change employers without a lengthy waiting period before we could be fully covered by the new employer’s group plan.
PA Senator Pat Toomey, who narrowly won reelection against a relatively unknown opponent is all in on the repeal of the ACA.
PA stands to lose about $4 Billion in Medicaid funding if the ACA is repealed. His idea is to have the state pick that up as though it is a simple matter of raising taxes on its citizens while millionaires like Toomey get a huge tax reduction PA has enough serious budget problems that this one would likely be a disaster for many of little means in the state and our legislature is controlled by the GOP. Ponder that for a moment.
The irony of all this is that those who voted for Toomey and Trump in the last election will likely the most affected by repeal. Most of those people don't read the NYT and if your live in PA and read this you should be very concerned about Mr. Toomey's support of the current GOP health plan. Contacting him is a futile effort as he is a low response Senator who promotes his party over people.
PA stands to lose about $4 Billion in Medicaid funding if the ACA is repealed. His idea is to have the state pick that up as though it is a simple matter of raising taxes on its citizens while millionaires like Toomey get a huge tax reduction PA has enough serious budget problems that this one would likely be a disaster for many of little means in the state and our legislature is controlled by the GOP. Ponder that for a moment.
The irony of all this is that those who voted for Toomey and Trump in the last election will likely the most affected by repeal. Most of those people don't read the NYT and if your live in PA and read this you should be very concerned about Mr. Toomey's support of the current GOP health plan. Contacting him is a futile effort as he is a low response Senator who promotes his party over people.
44
I have contacted Sen Toomey's office several times this year (not about ACA). The response - silence. And I am concerned about GOP health Plan.
7
So PA stands to "lose" $4 billion that the federal government "promised" but has to borrow to provide? And has a $20 trillion debt already?
Think about your children and grandchildren for heavens sake. What's wrong with you!
Think about your children and grandchildren for heavens sake. What's wrong with you!
1
The real problem with the ACA is that the ideologues in the Republican party would rather take us back to the last century when medical care was dispensed according to rules set by insurance companies. I know from personal experience that didn't work. The GOP negativity (as opposed to creativity, which they don't seem to have) is the problem now. It is the primary cause that the ACA is having issues because there's no view forward for the insurance companies. Single payer would be great, but with these people in control of state and federal governments it ain't gonna happen.
9
As I recall, the ACA was a "train wreck" before even so much as one insurance policy was written under its guidelines. That it is "collapsing," "imploding," or "exploding," contradictory descriptions of an insurance system that is far from perfect but seemingly working pretty well, should be no surprise. Nor should the lack of an actual fix be anything other than a recognition that the train wreck exists only in the Republican caucus.
26
I love the comments --- "why don't we consider the ACA what it was --- a transition plan to single payer?", or "what this country needs is a single payer plan based on a tax as suggested by the Supreme Court." Or "imagine how successful the ACA would be if the Republicans had not obstructed it". Except that the ACA was never presented to the American people this way. In fact, quite the opposite ---and opposition to it has been loud and persistent. Except that we were told by its supporters it was not a tax, and the Supreme Court is not meant to create legislation, so their suggestions are really quite anti-democratic. And when all is said and done, legislation, designed poorly, implemented badly, and that denies the physics of the industry it purports to control will always fail, regardless of the opposition or support it faces. So the logic of the NYTimes reader is --- we passed a horrible law, which was opposed by the majority of Americans, we implemented it even more badly, and lost 1000 elections at every level of government in the interim, so now give us everything we wanted in the form of a complete takeover of healthcare by the same institution that gave us the Veterans Administration. Given the last 8 years of experience and data, not one moment of reflection that perhaps your approach was wrong? This is what passes for rational political argument.
10
ACA or any other government plan is not "a complete take over of health care". It is a take over of paying for health care, and the goal should be to entirely eliminate the profit motive, the private insurance company middlemen who add NOTHING to the quality of our health care, in fact diminish it, and removing the obcenely huge salaries of the CEOs and executives running the health insurance "industry" scams/grifts.
Yes, people will have to transition to other paper pusher jobs if for profit health care is cut, but that is happening anyway in many industries due to technology, globalization, etc. Maybe the paper pushers could be incorporated into the transition phase to non-profit single payer. With the elimination of the useless highly paid CEOs and executives, of course. There is NO justification for the current system, except greed. The American way, is greed. No other advanced country has such a pathology, and we should be ashamed that our country functions totally on greed.
Yes, people will have to transition to other paper pusher jobs if for profit health care is cut, but that is happening anyway in many industries due to technology, globalization, etc. Maybe the paper pushers could be incorporated into the transition phase to non-profit single payer. With the elimination of the useless highly paid CEOs and executives, of course. There is NO justification for the current system, except greed. The American way, is greed. No other advanced country has such a pathology, and we should be ashamed that our country functions totally on greed.
6
I'm convinced that when it comes to policy, liberals do not process facts as they exist in the real world but rather as they'd like them to be in a utopian one.
Now it's "single payer." They simply ignore the problems with Obamacare, blaming every single problem on someone else (ex., insurers, republicans, Trump, etc.) It would have been perfect if not for the fact that people actually opposed it. It's others' fault for opposing their perfect solution.
We heard it all before with Obamacare, ex., how Obamacare would solve all our problems. Now we hear how single payer is THE solution. They always have the perfect solution. They just can never come up with something that actually delivers on the promises. And when their utopia fails to materialize, you can be sure the republicans will receive all the blame.
Now it's "single payer." They simply ignore the problems with Obamacare, blaming every single problem on someone else (ex., insurers, republicans, Trump, etc.) It would have been perfect if not for the fact that people actually opposed it. It's others' fault for opposing their perfect solution.
We heard it all before with Obamacare, ex., how Obamacare would solve all our problems. Now we hear how single payer is THE solution. They always have the perfect solution. They just can never come up with something that actually delivers on the promises. And when their utopia fails to materialize, you can be sure the republicans will receive all the blame.
2
This comment is broad and sweeping, so I'll limit my reply. First, Republican dominance of state and federal elections isn't exactly the will of the people. Read Jane Mayer's book, "Dark Money," to understand how the Koch brothers and their cabal have built a machine to influence election results. Sad to say, we have been "played" by super-rich libertarians who don't care a whit about liberal or conservative values. Their stated objective is to eliminate government involvement is almost everything, including health care.
JMR thinks that he is speaking for the "NYTimes reader" as if NYT readers are united in all opinions and viewpoints. This is suggested by phrases like "...your approach is wrong." In reality, JMR can only speak for himself unless he is the appointed spokesman for some organization. He has no crystal ball as how millions of readers think.
I encourage other readers here to address some of JMR's innuendos.
JMR thinks that he is speaking for the "NYTimes reader" as if NYT readers are united in all opinions and viewpoints. This is suggested by phrases like "...your approach is wrong." In reality, JMR can only speak for himself unless he is the appointed spokesman for some organization. He has no crystal ball as how millions of readers think.
I encourage other readers here to address some of JMR's innuendos.
Although I would greatly prefer a single payer system, it occurs to me that the discarded "public option" would resolve most of the problems with the insurance marketplace. Why don't the Democrats re-introduce that idea?
8
Hillary Clinton's health care plan included support for a public option and allowing people over 55 to buy into Medicare. It was on her campaign website. So, the Democrats have never abandoned that goal, which, if implemented, would both lower costs and premiums and provide a non-disruptive path to single payer should private insurance prove unable to compete.
3
Absolutely! In the end, single payer, even with the increased tax, would be less expensive than an employer-based/marketplace insurance system. Out-of-pocket costs will go down. Remember - a dollar is a dollar is a dollar, regardless of whether that dollar is paying a tax or paying for an insurance policy.
The ACA has turned out to be a disaster for the people forced to buy on the individual market whose income is too high for the ACA subsidy regime. This group of as many as ten million people have seen their premiums/deductibles triple, and the quality of the insurance they get decrease. They are being priced out of the market. They are the only group being asked to subsidize the ACA with higher premiums. In fact, they are the only group in the country who do not get a federal government subsidy for their health insurance. This is a gross injustice, imposed in an increasingly futile effort to extract a subsidy from these people. They tend to be small business, professional and trades people, who are by no means rich. Increasingly, only those with pre-existing conditions buy the grossly overpriced coverage; the rest will roll the dice, knowing that if something goes wrong they can
reup at the next open enrollment period. There are no records of the size of this group, nor the rate at which they are dropping their insurance. The CBO can only estimate their number, and their current insurance status, via historical census surveys. These surveys look back at some historical period, and thereby neglect the impact of the recent premium/ deductible increases. There is a bias toward reporting coverage when answering the survey, otherwise people would have to confirm that they are violating the law by not having compliant insurance.
reup at the next open enrollment period. There are no records of the size of this group, nor the rate at which they are dropping their insurance. The CBO can only estimate their number, and their current insurance status, via historical census surveys. These surveys look back at some historical period, and thereby neglect the impact of the recent premium/ deductible increases. There is a bias toward reporting coverage when answering the survey, otherwise people would have to confirm that they are violating the law by not having compliant insurance.
9
I rolled the dice, 1st time ever without insurance and I'm 52 yo, Thank God healthy...NC has 1 provider, the prices are staggering and the quality of insurance is basic high deductible catastrophic plan. There are states without any insurance providers in the plan, what are they to do ? Something needs to be done, self employed doesn't equate to being wealthy, the premise that most are provided insurance through their jobs is a fantasy, most jobs now are on consulting basis, with a minimal policy that employees pays into...its not working, great idea but unfair to the self employed. So 20 million have insurance now, let talk about the 10 million like me that are priced out of the market?
24
James Lowe nails it.
One of the reasons people are priced out, particularly in Red States, is that these states, like North Carolina, failed to expand Medicaid, so people in the individual market are pooled with the sickest and poorest people, driving up prices and lowering profitability for private insurance companies. Another reason is the hostility of the Republican Congress that has done its level best to crash Obamacare by, among other moves, discarding the risk corridors, a re-insurance program that would have encouraged insurance companies to compete in high-cost rural areas. Democrats are committed to lowering costs and improving access; Republicans are not. The thing that needs to be done is for voters to stop voting for people who don't have their best interests at heart.
1
It is painful to witness the dance around the fire regarding health insurance for the citizen of the United States of America , so many words are used to mask the real issue with insurance , subsidies, market place and Medicaid ,politicians have the duty to design a safety net for every citizen and do everything they can ,instead of avoiding doing so under the umbrella of Liberty , freedom ,etc, etc, in reality the pharmaceutical company are making sure that the status quo is alive and well and drugs prices stay a monopoly , senator Bocker a Democrat from NJ know it well since his vote was bough for 260 k by lobbyist.
There is so many way to exercise your freedom and individualism in America ,and not getting a health insurance is not the smartest one , endangered yourself and forcing your family to live on the edge of bankruptcy is silly , this idea of Socialist evil system run by government is way overblown , and yes your government could and should provide with the bare minimum of what living in society means , health insurance , school for your children , paved roads is what you pay taxes for, politicians spend so much energy avoiding accepting that the ACA was done by president Obama , it is a good start, Medicare was also not well received at the beginning , now everyone love it, single payer is the way to go , stop resisting , we will all benefit from it.
We the voters would enjoy the opportunity to get the same insurance that the government is giving to them.
There is so many way to exercise your freedom and individualism in America ,and not getting a health insurance is not the smartest one , endangered yourself and forcing your family to live on the edge of bankruptcy is silly , this idea of Socialist evil system run by government is way overblown , and yes your government could and should provide with the bare minimum of what living in society means , health insurance , school for your children , paved roads is what you pay taxes for, politicians spend so much energy avoiding accepting that the ACA was done by president Obama , it is a good start, Medicare was also not well received at the beginning , now everyone love it, single payer is the way to go , stop resisting , we will all benefit from it.
We the voters would enjoy the opportunity to get the same insurance that the government is giving to them.
8
This is great news - we can tell the Republicans to move on to tax reform then.
No more ACA worries.
No more ACA worries.
1
So you missed the part about improving it
I'm one of the 71%. On May 23 I sent this email to the the Republicans that were drafting their bill. I never got a reply.
Dear Senators,
As you craft your bill for reforming health insurance I implore you to adopt as the underlying principal the purpose of the Constitution of the United States itself as stated in it’s Preamble, "promote the general Welfare.” In our time for me that means reliable health insurance for all Americans and that each should pay according to his or her ability to pay.
I encourage you to hold public, open hearings so that you can consider the views of everyday Americans as well as respected organizations such as the American Nurses Association, American Medical Association American Hospital Association, American Cancer Association, American Heart Association, American Lung Association, American Diabetes Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, AARP as well as representatives of the Health Insurance Industry. I also encourage you to work together with Democrats to craft a compromise that represents the views of ALL Americans.
Finally, I firmly oppose enormous tax cuts for the most fortunate among us, especially in this time when there is such a great divide between the wealthy and the poor and middle classes.
Thank you for considering my views. I can only hope that you take them to heart.
Dear Senators,
As you craft your bill for reforming health insurance I implore you to adopt as the underlying principal the purpose of the Constitution of the United States itself as stated in it’s Preamble, "promote the general Welfare.” In our time for me that means reliable health insurance for all Americans and that each should pay according to his or her ability to pay.
I encourage you to hold public, open hearings so that you can consider the views of everyday Americans as well as respected organizations such as the American Nurses Association, American Medical Association American Hospital Association, American Cancer Association, American Heart Association, American Lung Association, American Diabetes Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, AARP as well as representatives of the Health Insurance Industry. I also encourage you to work together with Democrats to craft a compromise that represents the views of ALL Americans.
Finally, I firmly oppose enormous tax cuts for the most fortunate among us, especially in this time when there is such a great divide between the wealthy and the poor and middle classes.
Thank you for considering my views. I can only hope that you take them to heart.
13
Does it surprise you that you never got a reply to your well considered and well written letter? As George Carlin, the deceased comedian used to say, 'it's a big club, and you're not in it".
We can't leave it to the politicians of either party--they're worse than useless. It will be a grass roots effort that will make change. Nurses are going on strike across Massachusetts, and Calif nurses are pushing the Dems toward action. That is what it will take.
We can't leave it to the politicians of either party--they're worse than useless. It will be a grass roots effort that will make change. Nurses are going on strike across Massachusetts, and Calif nurses are pushing the Dems toward action. That is what it will take.
"But Mr. McConnell and his party have become so blinded by their rage against Obamacare that they are losing sight of what ought to be their goal: safeguarding the health of their constituents."
That is not and never has been their goal. Their goal is and always has been to reduce taxes on the uber-wealthy "job creators," who don't create jobs and often are little more than rentiers, or bankers who privatize gains and socialize losses, as in 2008.
Once you accept that inescapable truth, everything else they do makes sense.
That is not and never has been their goal. Their goal is and always has been to reduce taxes on the uber-wealthy "job creators," who don't create jobs and often are little more than rentiers, or bankers who privatize gains and socialize losses, as in 2008.
Once you accept that inescapable truth, everything else they do makes sense.
58
Being a Republican politician and working on legislation... "safeguarding the health of their constituents." is a contradiction in terms. Republicans are nothing more than taxpayer lobbyists protecting and promoting the interests of corporations and the wealthiest Americans.
35
We need to address the high costs of healthcare for any new regime to work. The ACA did not and neither will the Republican plan. We need to address the following
1. Administrative costs. Hospitals with more administrators than patients is absurd. That's 25% of all costs.
2. Drug prices are absolutely astonishing in this country. They need to be negotiated down.
3. Doctors (and especialy Specialists) and facilities are simply charging too much. We need to cap their costs more stringently.
4. We are being over treated. Even though in most cases it's fairly obvious what's wrong we are tested and sometimes treated for an entire array of conditions "just in case". Probably because doctors so feaful of being sued (over 75 % of doctors are sued at least once, almost 100% in some specialisms)
5. Per above, tort reform
Unfortunately both major parties are beholden unto the healthcare lobby, which is I'm sure why we don't see much progress, especially when it comes to 0ur drug prices, however until something is done to adddress costs in some meaningful way, any new healthcare regime will merely be the shuffling of the burden of that cost from one group to another
1. Administrative costs. Hospitals with more administrators than patients is absurd. That's 25% of all costs.
2. Drug prices are absolutely astonishing in this country. They need to be negotiated down.
3. Doctors (and especialy Specialists) and facilities are simply charging too much. We need to cap their costs more stringently.
4. We are being over treated. Even though in most cases it's fairly obvious what's wrong we are tested and sometimes treated for an entire array of conditions "just in case". Probably because doctors so feaful of being sued (over 75 % of doctors are sued at least once, almost 100% in some specialisms)
5. Per above, tort reform
Unfortunately both major parties are beholden unto the healthcare lobby, which is I'm sure why we don't see much progress, especially when it comes to 0ur drug prices, however until something is done to adddress costs in some meaningful way, any new healthcare regime will merely be the shuffling of the burden of that cost from one group to another
24
Hjb , certainly the cost of healthcare per individual in the USA has been shown many times to be twice as high as other developed nations. So yes fix the cost structure eg. repeal the law that prevents the gov`t from negotiating drug costs but also close some of the 800+ US offshore military bases and bring the troops home. More healthcare funds & less Military-Industrial Complex costs that IKE warned about.
The Affordable Care Act has made health care unaffordable. That's the real story. And the fact is that other countries throughout the world provide better health care at far less cost. We need a single payer system based on a tax, just like the Supreme Court suggested.
16
Whereas I cannot agree with the notion that the ACA is what has made health care unafforadable given that health care was out of reach for so many Americans prior to implementation of the ACA and the fact that insurance costs were perpetually rising, I do fully agree with the need for a single payer system. Healthcare delivery in this country has consistently been a politicized topic. Scare tactics that a single payer system will lead us to socialism has been an ongoing charade. But, don't blame the ACA for high costs that predated its inception.
5
Why not view the ACA ( Obamacare ) exactly what it is, a transition to the inevitable need for a single payer system. The biggest problem with the ACA was attempting to placate the insurance companies in the first place. Now, McConnell is trying to rescue the health insurers once again with a plan that raises premiums and deductibles and avoids paying benefits for the most essential needs. If insurance companies can't manage their business in a manner that will gain market support, it is not McConnell's place to rig the system in their favor. Single payer universal coverage for all is inevitable. Let Congress write a Cadillac Plan for themselves and allow the country to move on with the civilized world. It would be worth the trade off.
6
The core question is do we want to nationalize an industry that, for better or worse, was structured as a for-profit model and today accounts for 16% of GDP? I'm not saying we should or should not. But that is the question.
What will lower costs and improve outcomes are folks being vigilant about their health-related behaviors and medical science leveraging the I.T. tools that are all around it. I am a layperson, but for further guidance I'd recommend a recent WSJ op-ed written by a cardiologist on this issue
What will lower costs and improve outcomes are folks being vigilant about their health-related behaviors and medical science leveraging the I.T. tools that are all around it. I am a layperson, but for further guidance I'd recommend a recent WSJ op-ed written by a cardiologist on this issue
2
I grew up with the NHS. In may says it is a wonderful institution where care is provided free at the point of use and there is no discrimination, funded by the tax payer. There are many downsides though, it's an absolute administrative monolith, the third largest employer in the world. The is no choice, wait times can be onerous and drugs rationed or not available at all. Can you begin to imagine how it would work out here in the US with the high costs we have, and you only have to look at public organizations like the DMV to see how what we'll end up with running the show.
It's a socialists dream but in reality a nightmare for many and what we'd end up with is a two tier system; Medicare that's free but not good quality, you'll have to wait, and don't expect everything to be covered and a private insurance system akin to what we have today but free from any government ties. Pick your poison.
It's a socialists dream but in reality a nightmare for many and what we'd end up with is a two tier system; Medicare that's free but not good quality, you'll have to wait, and don't expect everything to be covered and a private insurance system akin to what we have today but free from any government ties. Pick your poison.
3
@Ghhbcast--Yes, good point, because a large number of Congress members are, themselves, parasites (I won't name names), just like the insurance companies.
Let's join the civilized world with single payer!
Let's join the civilized world with single payer!
We need a public option structured something Medicare Advantage policies. That way, we can keep the insurance companies, since that what the ACA is all about. Doing so adds about 20% to healthcare costs, but that is how we do things in America, corporations come first, the rich come in a close second and the rest of us come in last.
With the Advantage system, the insurer gets a set amount per enrollee and then they can tailor their offerings to the public for an extra fee.
The insurance pools are too small. The more companies involved, the smaller the pools for each company. If we are going to revamp healthcare, then revamp all of it. Everyone should be on the system. All 330 million of us. Employer provided healthcare should be phased out and replaced with an Advantage type system funded with our tax dollars.
Gosh! Did I just provide a rational argument for Medicare for all that allows private insurance companies to stay in business? Hold on, I think that's what we used to call a compromise. Remember those?
Over 40% of the population is already on government health insurance. Why can't the rest of us join the party?
For those out there that are opposed because we would have to raise taxes:
If you add the cost of private insurance to the tax base, we end up paying as much or more than our European counterparts and they have great coverage. No one over there goes broke if they get sick. They just get taken care of.
Think about it.
With the Advantage system, the insurer gets a set amount per enrollee and then they can tailor their offerings to the public for an extra fee.
The insurance pools are too small. The more companies involved, the smaller the pools for each company. If we are going to revamp healthcare, then revamp all of it. Everyone should be on the system. All 330 million of us. Employer provided healthcare should be phased out and replaced with an Advantage type system funded with our tax dollars.
Gosh! Did I just provide a rational argument for Medicare for all that allows private insurance companies to stay in business? Hold on, I think that's what we used to call a compromise. Remember those?
Over 40% of the population is already on government health insurance. Why can't the rest of us join the party?
For those out there that are opposed because we would have to raise taxes:
If you add the cost of private insurance to the tax base, we end up paying as much or more than our European counterparts and they have great coverage. No one over there goes broke if they get sick. They just get taken care of.
Think about it.
11
@Mr. Rozenblit---Yes, single payer the only decent conclusion. The problem is that at this time, the dominant players in our government have zero interest in decency. It appears that they view the unrich the way ranchers view their cattle: feed lot animals. We are being set up to be "feed lot animals" for the rich.
4
No, Mary, it's not "decency" that concerns them. It's costs. Someone has to keep an eye on costs. Obamacare blew a hole in its costs estimates.
There's nothing "decent" about increasing costs hundreds of billions of dollars in a few short years without any care at all as to how the money is spent. That's malfeasance, which cannot be excused because democrats "care."
There's nothing "decent" about increasing costs hundreds of billions of dollars in a few short years without any care at all as to how the money is spent. That's malfeasance, which cannot be excused because democrats "care."
2
@AACNY--Well that depends on how you define "malfeasance", I believe.
Deductibles for commercial plans are continuing to increase across the nation. Costs not paid for be Medicare and Medicaid are shifted to private plans. The ACA has accelerated this impact. The Republican plan also only would rearrange chairs on the deck of this sinking ship. Our plan now has a $6,000 deductible, compared to $1,000 six years ago. This editorial is simply magical thinking. The employer-based system is collapsing, and to fail to recognize that fact only delays a true debate about necessary replacements.
9
"insurers that sell policies to individuals and families are doing better financially than in the first two years of the A.C.A. They are also doing better than they were before the federal and state governments opened the marketplaces in 2014"
The NY Times considers this good news. Sort of like they considered the illegal war of aggression on Iraq as something to be supported.
The NY Times considers this good news. Sort of like they considered the illegal war of aggression on Iraq as something to be supported.
3
When speaking of the Cruz plan to allow cheaper policies with skimpier coverage, the focus always seems to be the cost element, i.e., that sicker folks would opt for the fuller, more expensive plans thus driving up costs. Also of concern, though, is that "healthier" folks do not stay healthy forever. What the plan does is offer the illusion of coverage to the currently healthy. No one thinks she needs extensive coverage for devastating and expensive illness or a tragic accident until suddenly she does. If the patient has been deluded into thinking that she doesn't "need" much insurance, she may find herself without coverage when disaster strikes.
We are healthy until we get sick; we are uninjured until we have an accident. The point of insurance is to cover the just-in-case. It is a cruel trick to let people think that because they are healthy today, they do not need much coverage. It is a trick on them and on the rest of us because when they do inevitably need care the rest of us will end up covering the cost either through our higher insurance/healthcare costs or through our taxes.
We are healthy until we get sick; we are uninjured until we have an accident. The point of insurance is to cover the just-in-case. It is a cruel trick to let people think that because they are healthy today, they do not need much coverage. It is a trick on them and on the rest of us because when they do inevitably need care the rest of us will end up covering the cost either through our higher insurance/healthcare costs or through our taxes.
72
@Anne-Marie Hislop--"rest of us will end up covering the cost either through our higher insurance/healthcare costs or through our taxes." Yes we will (except for those who can dodge taxes such as President Trump and his cronies.)
Imagine how much better the ACA would be doing if Republicans had helped tune it rather than sabotaging it over the past 6 years.
157
This editorial says as much about democratic weakness as it does about lies being told by republicans about the ACA.
Silence by democratic members of Congress in defense of Obamacare has been muted ever since the mid-term elections in 2010 and 2014 and not much better in presidential election years of 2012 and 16.
When will Democrats show some courage?
.
Silence by democratic members of Congress in defense of Obamacare has been muted ever since the mid-term elections in 2010 and 2014 and not much better in presidential election years of 2012 and 16.
When will Democrats show some courage?
.
74
@JT--"When will Democrats show some courage? Except for a few, Elizabeth and Bernie for example, it ain't gonna happen. I afraid it's up to us grunts.
@JT-
Democrats will "show some courage", as you put it, after Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer and other members-in-good-standing of her little gang resigns and leaves the scene, not a moment before.
Our predicament brings to mind the horrendous situation the British confronted in May 1940. Conservative Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, architect of Appeasement, especially notorious for his "peace in our time" pronunciamento after the 1938 Munich sellout of Czechoslovakia, was presiding over the greatest overthrow of British arms in Britain's history; defeat and disaster. Yet like Prime Minister May today he stubbornly clung to power, until confronted by a sudden Conservative backbencher uprising in the House of Commons; his own political party. As the debate approached its climax Conservative MP Leo Amery quoted Oliver Cromwell's words to the Long Parliament after it had repeatedly proved itself unequal to the tasks before it, unable to legislate even in the face of an enormous civil crisis: "You have sat too long here for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go".
No coalition of congressional Democrats can find the nerve to deliver a similar verdict and command to Queen Nancy and her loyal sidekick, Steny.
Democrats will "show some courage", as you put it, after Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer and other members-in-good-standing of her little gang resigns and leaves the scene, not a moment before.
Our predicament brings to mind the horrendous situation the British confronted in May 1940. Conservative Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, architect of Appeasement, especially notorious for his "peace in our time" pronunciamento after the 1938 Munich sellout of Czechoslovakia, was presiding over the greatest overthrow of British arms in Britain's history; defeat and disaster. Yet like Prime Minister May today he stubbornly clung to power, until confronted by a sudden Conservative backbencher uprising in the House of Commons; his own political party. As the debate approached its climax Conservative MP Leo Amery quoted Oliver Cromwell's words to the Long Parliament after it had repeatedly proved itself unequal to the tasks before it, unable to legislate even in the face of an enormous civil crisis: "You have sat too long here for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go".
No coalition of congressional Democrats can find the nerve to deliver a similar verdict and command to Queen Nancy and her loyal sidekick, Steny.
One other thought: Why not have, once and for all, a referendum on Obamacare? Clearly, the invalid last election was not one.
That would demonstrate if pols who repeatedly claim to be killing ACA in response to an electoral mandate are truly in sync with the wishes of American voters. Judging by the uproar at town hall meetings in the districts, there appears to be condiderable disconnect over that question.
That would demonstrate if pols who repeatedly claim to be killing ACA in response to an electoral mandate are truly in sync with the wishes of American voters. Judging by the uproar at town hall meetings in the districts, there appears to be condiderable disconnect over that question.
13
You simply don't understand. Profits may be higher for insurance companies. But they aren't high enough. The wealthy have done well after the recession. Really well. But not well enough. The American people will only do better once the ceiling has been lifted on profit and wealth. And once comprehensive healthcare is only available to those who can afford it, we will all feel better. Now, let's get down to work and make America Great Again.
37
Careful, Republicans will not get your satire and think you're being serious. Remember how many Republicans watched "The Colbert Report" for years and never once realized he was savagely mocking them. So will it be with your post.
3
"Yet Republicans in Congress and the Trump administration continue to peddle horror stories about the A.C.A. as they try to gather the votes for repeal of major provisions of the law." What should have been added to this sentence is that Democrats have not countered the Republican smear tactics with an equally aggressive pro-A.C.A. campaign. Thus, the negative view of the A.C.A. persists in the minds of far too many people. Neither have Democrats presented to the public their solutions for the needed fixes for the A.C.A. Messaging is so important, and Democrats, as usual, are losing to Republicans in that effort. Hopefully, the truly dreadful Senate bill will make the public see the importance of the A.C.A.
61
Nothing is ever made to work by people who don't want it to work.
169
Republicans repudiate the concept of evolution. Yet their party has evolved further to the right. To enact legislation such as the A.C.A. and not tweak it is similar to what Mr McConnell did to the Merit Garland nomination for the Supreme Court; allow it to twist in the wind. In something as complicated as health care legislation one can always find instances of failed policy. The question of replacing it vs repairing it comes down to which path ultimately better fulfils the common good.
14
@Schiffman -
The greatest mass extiction since the age of the dinosaurs, in at least the last 65-million years, is currently underway worldwide:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/07/170710161009.htm
Has been ongoing for the last 6,000 years, actually. Nothing less than the annihilation of the web of life itself. And it's caused by our civilization, by human economic activity -- caused by us and our machines. A crisis of epic proportions that puts all others in the shade, including our Trump disaster.
But many Republicans are oblivious. Either they are totally ignorant about it and its implications to our species future, which also happens to be their grandchildrens' fate; or simply because they choose to ignore it. They won't allow themselves to be concerned. They won't read news reports about it or don't believe them if they do; just more "fake news". Or, many don't want to know. They don't understand the science, because they never studied science in school because they didn't want to understand it; why scientific evidence doesn't matter to them. Science doesn't exist for them. Many say that because life on Earth was created by "God" He will take care of it, and them.
Millions of undereducated, mediocre ignorant people hold the future of our planet, what many call "God's Creation", in their hands yet are intent on throwing it away. By the time they come to their senses it will be too late.
The greatest mass extiction since the age of the dinosaurs, in at least the last 65-million years, is currently underway worldwide:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/07/170710161009.htm
Has been ongoing for the last 6,000 years, actually. Nothing less than the annihilation of the web of life itself. And it's caused by our civilization, by human economic activity -- caused by us and our machines. A crisis of epic proportions that puts all others in the shade, including our Trump disaster.
But many Republicans are oblivious. Either they are totally ignorant about it and its implications to our species future, which also happens to be their grandchildrens' fate; or simply because they choose to ignore it. They won't allow themselves to be concerned. They won't read news reports about it or don't believe them if they do; just more "fake news". Or, many don't want to know. They don't understand the science, because they never studied science in school because they didn't want to understand it; why scientific evidence doesn't matter to them. Science doesn't exist for them. Many say that because life on Earth was created by "God" He will take care of it, and them.
Millions of undereducated, mediocre ignorant people hold the future of our planet, what many call "God's Creation", in their hands yet are intent on throwing it away. By the time they come to their senses it will be too late.
Good points. It is important to keep in mind that global warming and the overpopulation that it is tied to will not end life on earth. It will end human life. After we are gone, the remaining life forms will gradually adjust.
If McConnell thinks his plan is so good, let's move all our veterans onto it and close down the V.A. system. Surely, our vets deserve the superior access to health care that the free market provides.
188
If McConnell thinks his plan is so good, let's move all Congressmen over to it; and let's also move DJT onto it too.
61
The problem is that we have a disproportionately high percentage of our Congressmen and Senators, especially, covered by Medicare and are personally unaffected regardless. This is just one more instance where we have a un-representative form of governance.
1
Move congressmen on it also.
1
The GOP's rage is probably less about the ACA than the President for whom it was a signature issue.
218
Exactly. Obama's presidency proved that he is intelligent, thoughtful, caring and kind. These are all things that the Republicans hate. Just about the only thing that they don't hate is giving millions of dollars to the plutocrats who own them.
1
"Probably?"
Definitely!
Definitely!
1
There is little or no acknowledgment that "subsidies" are actually paid for by the middle class. Higher taxes (for medicaid) and higher deductibles (augmented by the health insurer tax) are how we are subsidizing "Obamacare". Perhaps if the program had been nick-named, "America-cares" it would have more resonance with the truth. Another striking problem with the opinion is how to address the rising cost of medical / per capita. The finger wagging approach of liberals is just not strong enough to address the serious issues at hand.
11
I'm not aware of any middle class tax increases to pay for the ACA. It's paid for through taxes on investment income for those earning over $250,000 annually, taxes on insurers, the individual mandate, and fees on device manufacturers. On the other hand, we pay for all employer-provided health insurance through taxpayer subsidies. It seems inconsistent to complain about subsidies for the ACA and not subsidies for employer insurance.
Liberals have addressed the rising cost of health care. It's called allowing the federal government to negotiate prices. This works well for Medicare, the VA and Medicaid. We should apply Medicare to the entire country. The only solution I've seen the right offer to rising costs is either to cut off health care at the knees (the present GOP proposals to gut Medicaid) or to raise deductibles and co-pays (the latest Senate GOP proposal) in the mistaken belief that the people who buy on the exchanges spend health care dollars foolishly. If you want to make a real dent in federal spending on health care, eliminate taxpayer subsidies for employer-sponsored insurance. It makes no sense to attack one minor part of the spending but ignore the elephant in the room.
Liberals have addressed the rising cost of health care. It's called allowing the federal government to negotiate prices. This works well for Medicare, the VA and Medicaid. We should apply Medicare to the entire country. The only solution I've seen the right offer to rising costs is either to cut off health care at the knees (the present GOP proposals to gut Medicaid) or to raise deductibles and co-pays (the latest Senate GOP proposal) in the mistaken belief that the people who buy on the exchanges spend health care dollars foolishly. If you want to make a real dent in federal spending on health care, eliminate taxpayer subsidies for employer-sponsored insurance. It makes no sense to attack one minor part of the spending but ignore the elephant in the room.
128
@Sandra H,
Sandra, I have been commenting on "the elephant in the room" since the beginning of the ACA debate in the Obama Administration. Only very recently have I seen a smattering of others like yourself addressing it-- which is a positive development, but we have a long way to go...
And I think we have to acknowledge that the denial/hypocrisy/ignorance about the tax subsidy for employer supplied insurance is a bipartisan problem. Remember, the "cadillac tax" in ACA was put off by due to union pressure.
And while it isn't a scientific result, in my observations over these years, all the supposedly "liberal" commenters on NYT articles have been just as unwilling to acknowledge the distortions that ESI has brought to the marketplace:
They blame everything except the fact that for what, 60 years now, tax revenue that should have been flowing to all programs proportionately has been sequestered to the healthcare-industrial-complex.
And we wonder why our healthcare costs are twice that of other countries?
Sandra, I have been commenting on "the elephant in the room" since the beginning of the ACA debate in the Obama Administration. Only very recently have I seen a smattering of others like yourself addressing it-- which is a positive development, but we have a long way to go...
And I think we have to acknowledge that the denial/hypocrisy/ignorance about the tax subsidy for employer supplied insurance is a bipartisan problem. Remember, the "cadillac tax" in ACA was put off by due to union pressure.
And while it isn't a scientific result, in my observations over these years, all the supposedly "liberal" commenters on NYT articles have been just as unwilling to acknowledge the distortions that ESI has brought to the marketplace:
They blame everything except the fact that for what, 60 years now, tax revenue that should have been flowing to all programs proportionately has been sequestered to the healthcare-industrial-complex.
And we wonder why our healthcare costs are twice that of other countries?
8
Springtime, the medicaid tax surtax kicks in on wages over 200k per year, hardly middle class. And the medicaid tax on investment income hardly impacts the real middle class, not your imaginary middle class that earns well over 200k in wages. Pure nonsense.
3
Of course the ACA is not perfect, but its biggest flaws are being grievously exasperated by Republican sabotage. Then they cherry-pick the worst horror stories and feed them to the Fox News mimic monkeys for prompt regurgitation and appropriate "outrage" commentary. As an American who lives in a country with a well functioning health-care system, I feel great sorrow that this great nation, with all of its wealth and resources, can't do this one thing that almost all other westerns nations have achieved. Sweden's health care isn't perfect either, but for between 15 to 30 dollars per visit everyone has access to some of the best health care in the world. From prenatal care to cancer treatment to trauma surgery that is what it costs to get treatment in Sweden. And there is a hight-cost ceiling that caps the amount you pay in a year for treatment and for drugs at about 250 dollars. Yes, I pay taxes to support this and maybe I'm paying more than I get out of it at the moment. But I don't have worry about what if? Americans seem so worried that they might be paying to help some one else, but isn't that what insurance is for, to share the risks. We do it for houses and cars, but not our health?? Come on America, grow up and join the rest of the free world. Universal health care now!
446
@kevo--I totally agree with your comment, but you may not understand one big problem here. The problem is that our present government reacts to single payer health care the way ranchers would react if their cattle refused to enter a slaughterhouse.
@ kevo - kevo where have you been all this time? During the past two or three years I have filed 100s of comments making the same point in various ways. Since I am a dual citizen US SE who has lived in Sweden for 22 of my 85 with extensive experience on both sides of the Atlantic I was always able to point out that if you are an American retiree with Medicare (and a bit of supplementary insurance) you can do almost as well with health care - when in the US as concerns Medicare - as you can do in Sweden.
Since my ikon - not showing in replies - has a Vermont license plate on top of a Swedish flag many repliers told me that Swedes have no business commenting on US health care because Swedish health care has 100% blond blue eyed Swedes as patients. You know how dumb that view is.
Anyway great to see you here today. I have a comment over at the leukemia article - or maybe one of my replies - that notes that it would be interesting to learn how Sweden will deal with gene-modification personalized medicine in some future time.
Larry L.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen US SE
Since my ikon - not showing in replies - has a Vermont license plate on top of a Swedish flag many repliers told me that Swedes have no business commenting on US health care because Swedish health care has 100% blond blue eyed Swedes as patients. You know how dumb that view is.
Anyway great to see you here today. I have a comment over at the leukemia article - or maybe one of my replies - that notes that it would be interesting to learn how Sweden will deal with gene-modification personalized medicine in some future time.
Larry L.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen US SE
Thank you, Kevo.
It is all so simple. You pay for insurance up front and hope you never have to use it.
We have a high percentage of low information voters here in America. Hence, the precarious state we are in.
It is all so simple. You pay for insurance up front and hope you never have to use it.
We have a high percentage of low information voters here in America. Hence, the precarious state we are in.
1
The charade goes on and mainstream commentators must assume a posture of seriousness when discussing Republican proposals as if they are intended to be legislation that achieves what voters want and what they SAY they want.
The only intention of the New Southern Republican Party is to shrink the federal government any way they can get voters to swallow and allow their plutocratic extreme right wing donors to keep as much of their money as possible while allowing their politicians to hold onto their jobs.
This is a delicate choreography that requires the steady hands of a brain surgeon and the patience of a fly fisherman (on the part of the tacticians, at least), but the success of their relentless propaganda is gradually transforming our government into the image that the donors seek- whence we are discussing the ACA instead of universal health care.
The only intention of the New Southern Republican Party is to shrink the federal government any way they can get voters to swallow and allow their plutocratic extreme right wing donors to keep as much of their money as possible while allowing their politicians to hold onto their jobs.
This is a delicate choreography that requires the steady hands of a brain surgeon and the patience of a fly fisherman (on the part of the tacticians, at least), but the success of their relentless propaganda is gradually transforming our government into the image that the donors seek- whence we are discussing the ACA instead of universal health care.
85
Whoa!
Insurers took losses because of the ACA?
Please check with the folks in your Business Section. Have you seen the earnings statements of major health insurers and their stock prices?
What losses are you referring to?
Do you instead mean that they did not make extreme profits?
Insurers took losses because of the ACA?
Please check with the folks in your Business Section. Have you seen the earnings statements of major health insurers and their stock prices?
What losses are you referring to?
Do you instead mean that they did not make extreme profits?
288
@Steve
Bingo !
The ACA requires said companies to pay out something like 80-85% on actual health care costs. I am not sure what the percentages were before implementation, but you just got to believe those execs have had to cut back on the 2nd and 3rd homes, boats and cars because their bonuses are not as ''robust''
Bingo !
The ACA requires said companies to pay out something like 80-85% on actual health care costs. I am not sure what the percentages were before implementation, but you just got to believe those execs have had to cut back on the 2nd and 3rd homes, boats and cars because their bonuses are not as ''robust''
63
Correct! In 2016 the United Health Care CEO alone received compensation of 17.8 million!
88
No Steve, virtually all insurers participating in the ACA marketplaces lost money on that part of their business - that is premiums and stabilization payment "in" vs health care costs paid out, excluding any overhead. That is fact. And all of the nonprofit insurance cooperatives created under the ACA have gone bankrupt. Every last one. Fact.
9
"But Mr. McConnell and his party have become so blinded by their rage against Obamacare that they are losing sight of what ought to be their goal: safeguarding the health of their constituents."
What more need be said here? With the Republicans, it was never about serving the public good--about healthcare, jobs, opioid addiction--or anything else. This GOP-driven spite against the Affordable Care Act takes direct aim at the president to whom it is commonly referred: Barack Obama.
Your editorial rightly points out the law's most egregious deficiencies; but it also points out that the common-sense approach, collusion, if you will, and cooperation between the two parties, would strengthen the ACA and make it workable. That, however, is precisely what Republicans *do not* want; they wish ObamaCare to fall on its sword (or rather, the one they've held out since 2010) without in the slightest wise proposing a better alternative. The convenient cover to their unhappiness with the law is that Socialist notion that government should play a role in the healthcare of its citizens, across the board.
Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan, of course, are comforted by the knowledge that all they had to do, during the past seven years, was toss out the catnip of race to get their constituents scrambling to the voting booths to give the GOP majorities in both Houses on Capitol Hill and, disastrously, the presidency last year.
Congressional antipathy against the ACA is race-based. Nothing more.
What more need be said here? With the Republicans, it was never about serving the public good--about healthcare, jobs, opioid addiction--or anything else. This GOP-driven spite against the Affordable Care Act takes direct aim at the president to whom it is commonly referred: Barack Obama.
Your editorial rightly points out the law's most egregious deficiencies; but it also points out that the common-sense approach, collusion, if you will, and cooperation between the two parties, would strengthen the ACA and make it workable. That, however, is precisely what Republicans *do not* want; they wish ObamaCare to fall on its sword (or rather, the one they've held out since 2010) without in the slightest wise proposing a better alternative. The convenient cover to their unhappiness with the law is that Socialist notion that government should play a role in the healthcare of its citizens, across the board.
Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan, of course, are comforted by the knowledge that all they had to do, during the past seven years, was toss out the catnip of race to get their constituents scrambling to the voting booths to give the GOP majorities in both Houses on Capitol Hill and, disastrously, the presidency last year.
Congressional antipathy against the ACA is race-based. Nothing more.
244
Your ultimate conclusion is difficult for me to dispute (cause they could just implement measures to improve what's current) but I'm still attributing sheer stubbornness and spite.
22
I have little doubt that the former President's race is one source of Congressional hostility toward him. I do doubt it's the only one. It's reasonable to assume the Republican Party's positions are motivated primarily by the financial interests of its largest donors.
5
AND MONEY.
1
"just 23 percent want lawmakers to repeal and replace it"
Repeal and replace in that contest is just repeal. They haven't a clue about what might replace it, and those supporting it anyway just don't much care.
So those numbers are really 71% want health care, and 23% don't. There are always some fools who feel immortal.
Repeal and replace in that contest is just repeal. They haven't a clue about what might replace it, and those supporting it anyway just don't much care.
So those numbers are really 71% want health care, and 23% don't. There are always some fools who feel immortal.
216
My agreement % with your posts went up a little on that one:)
I guess it's up to around 55% agreement with your comments and even the ones I disagree; I agree with about 48% of the content:):)
Seriously, why don't they just "Improve" what's already there? There's only so much you can do/implement with Health Insurance.
I guess it's up to around 55% agreement with your comments and even the ones I disagree; I agree with about 48% of the content:):)
Seriously, why don't they just "Improve" what's already there? There's only so much you can do/implement with Health Insurance.
12
They could improve it best by making Medicaid more widely available.
It's benefits are better, especially co-pay and deductible. It is cheaper per person anyway.
However, the best thing is the way the program pushes down health care costs. Government legislated an inability to do that into Medicare, at great cost to all of us. The insurance industry tries, but any one of them has less leverage than a public option backed by lawmakers.
Our health care costs are at least 50% higher than they should be as % of GDP, compared to other modern countries that provide care for everyone at 2/3 the total % of GDP. That is the key fact that makes it so hard to pay for health care. Consider what would happen to any other industry if we put a 50% tax on top of its prices as a handicap. And this is a big one.
It's benefits are better, especially co-pay and deductible. It is cheaper per person anyway.
However, the best thing is the way the program pushes down health care costs. Government legislated an inability to do that into Medicare, at great cost to all of us. The insurance industry tries, but any one of them has less leverage than a public option backed by lawmakers.
Our health care costs are at least 50% higher than they should be as % of GDP, compared to other modern countries that provide care for everyone at 2/3 the total % of GDP. That is the key fact that makes it so hard to pay for health care. Consider what would happen to any other industry if we put a 50% tax on top of its prices as a handicap. And this is a big one.
4
Mark: no health care reform -- whether Obamacare or the AHCA or "Medicare For All" -- can ever, ever EVER work until we get a handle on COSTS.
And nobody on the left or right wishes to face this monster down. We pay the highest costs in the world, because we turned health care into a HUGE HUGE for-profit industry that supports close to 20% of our economy -- insurance, big pharma, big hospital chains, highly paid doctors & nurses, etc.
Our doctors ALONE earn from 100% more to 300% more than doctors in other countries, and I don't mean here "Africa" but Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Canada, Australia, etc. A German doctor earns $80,000 a year -- an American doctor expects to earn $250-$500,000 a year. Even if you figure med schools debts into this formula, the American doctor is way ahead in income by his 4th year of practice with his debts all or mostly paid off. From then on, it's pure gravy.
If all that were not bad enough...we can't manage to deport the 25 million illegal aliens that are here, and that will absolutely piggyback on any health care -- who already abuse Medicaid and SNAP and WIC for their anchor babies. Other nations do not have to deal with this. They need only provide their OWN legal citizens.
Lastly: just how many people do you want on 100% FREE Medicaid welfare? It is totally unsustainable as it is. It is impossible to provide FREE health care to this many people. Affordable, yes. FREE? no way.
And nobody on the left or right wishes to face this monster down. We pay the highest costs in the world, because we turned health care into a HUGE HUGE for-profit industry that supports close to 20% of our economy -- insurance, big pharma, big hospital chains, highly paid doctors & nurses, etc.
Our doctors ALONE earn from 100% more to 300% more than doctors in other countries, and I don't mean here "Africa" but Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Canada, Australia, etc. A German doctor earns $80,000 a year -- an American doctor expects to earn $250-$500,000 a year. Even if you figure med schools debts into this formula, the American doctor is way ahead in income by his 4th year of practice with his debts all or mostly paid off. From then on, it's pure gravy.
If all that were not bad enough...we can't manage to deport the 25 million illegal aliens that are here, and that will absolutely piggyback on any health care -- who already abuse Medicaid and SNAP and WIC for their anchor babies. Other nations do not have to deal with this. They need only provide their OWN legal citizens.
Lastly: just how many people do you want on 100% FREE Medicaid welfare? It is totally unsustainable as it is. It is impossible to provide FREE health care to this many people. Affordable, yes. FREE? no way.
Senator McConnell's professed rage against the ACA is a bit of a smoke-screen for a much more closely held desire to show faith to another longstanding Republican theology: tax cuts for the most affluent. The ACA belligerence is a foil to pander to a base that is increasingly recognizing--in many poorer red states--that their Medicaid lifeline will be cut to facilitate that not-so-hidden theology: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/medicaid-cuts-worsen-health-services... .
And it may yet happen that Senator McConnell will manage to wield the axe to cut so many life-lines. Would the upper 20% of those so economically advantaged be thrilled about their ill-gotten gains (more like a windfall for the upper 1%)? Given that only 17% of the populace favors the Republican plans--and many of those are hard core Trump supporters--it does not seem that even the presumed beneficiaries of this malevolence support the Republican senate "leader."
And it may yet happen that Senator McConnell will manage to wield the axe to cut so many life-lines. Would the upper 20% of those so economically advantaged be thrilled about their ill-gotten gains (more like a windfall for the upper 1%)? Given that only 17% of the populace favors the Republican plans--and many of those are hard core Trump supporters--it does not seem that even the presumed beneficiaries of this malevolence support the Republican senate "leader."
45
If everyone paid their fair share there would not be the negativity against the ACA. But when you have millions of able-bodied Medicaid recipients added at the expense of taxpayer subsidies you have to say enough is enough.
The GOP Congress is juggling their end of the world signs along with their other favorite targets like women and abortions. The problem with doomsday cults is that when the world doesn't actually end the day they claim, they adjust their thinking and revise the details to suit the facts.
The Republicans are a doomsday cult. But they don't get to destroy the rest of us with their death panels. Never vote Republican until they come back to their senses (unlikely).