• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

ACA Running Thread

tiltdeac said:
Besides the coverage losses, it looks like skinny repeal would require 60 votes. Not enough on budget savings.
Click to expand...

For serious? Link?

Great read from a former Republican:

There Is Never A 'Free Market' In Health Care


https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisladd/2017/03/07/there-is-never-a-free-market-in-health-care/amp/

In a free market, goods and services are allocated through transactions based on mutual consent. No one is forced to buy from a particular supplier. No one is forced to engage in any transaction at all. In a free market, no transactions occur if a price cannot be agreed.
The medical industry exists almost entirely to serve people who have been rendered incapable of representing their own interests in an adversarial transaction. When I need health services I often need them in a way that is quite different from my desire for a good quality television or a fine automobile. As I lie unconscious under a bus, I am in no position to shop for the best provider of ambulance services at the most reasonable price. All personal volition is lost. Whatever happens next, it will not be a market transaction.

...

One of the most frustrating obstacles to the growth of a broader entrepreneurship culture in the US is the structure of our health care system. It punishes innovators, chains employees to traditional work, and leaves millions of struggling Americans without access to care. We count on Republicans to deliver pragmatic, sensible solutions that foster a culture of business growth, but when it comes to health care Republicans are off their meds. Until the GOP is ready to move past their free market fundamentalist fantasies in health care and on other issues, our hopes of developing an ownership culture will remain stalled.
 
Last edited:
PhDeac said:
For serious? Link?
.
Click to expand...

I should preface this by saying what they are doing is completely unprecedented and who the hell knows what will actually happen, but there are a couple issues. The CBO score that was submitted is for the provisions that are expected/reported to be in the "skinny repeal" bill, but no one has actually seen the text of that bill because it hasn't been released (which is absurd in and of itself). But in order for any bill to pass reconciliation (and be able to be passed with only 50 votes) it needs to have at least as much on budget savings as the bill the House passed to get here ($133 billion). Per this most recent CBO report, it only would provide $78 billion in on budget deficit reduction, meaning it would need 60 votes. They will never get 60 votes for it, so they will have to add more cuts into the final bill somehow.

A second problem is that supposedly per Senate rules, if there is no CBO report at least 28 hours before a vote, they can trigger a point of order that would also require 60 votes. I have no idea if that's one of the Senate rules that can just be changed at McConnell's whim or not.
 
Last edited:
So CH and others have brought up one of the problems of the ACA people making >400% of the FPL because the tax credits abruptly stop at that level. While a relatively small percentage of people getting plans on the market overall, it's definitely a real problem (and one of the things they SHOULD be trying to fix instead of this charade in the Senate right now). Here's an analysis of extending the credits people >400% of FPL using RAND's model. Take home is it would cost ~$6 billion, reduce the uninsured rate by 1.2 million people, and improve the risk pool, decreasing premiums for all.

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/pub...ion?omnicid=EALERT1247883&mid=eibner@rand.org
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top