How do we clean up the American health care mess?

It seems that Onionoffailcare is on track to drive insurance companies into insolvency. Charles Krauthammer has pointed out that there’s a provision in the law for a massive government bailout. This won’t fix anything permanently, and it will drive the US further into fiscal disarray. Krauthammer suggests pushing for a repeal of the bailout provision. Let nature take its course.

That seems reckless to me, unless it’s combined with action to fix the root problem. We need to stop the collapse from happening at all, if we still can. Can this be done? How? Any ideas?

Not sure if I referenced this once before, but let’s give it a bump anyway:

freebeacon.com/the-right-medicine/

[quote]Rep. Tom Price (Ga.) reintroduced his “Empowering Patients First Act” this year, while the Republican Study Committee will release its own legislation as Congress comes back from the August recess, although details have been kept tightly under wraps.

Both of these proposals begin by replacing Obamacare.

“It sets up an alternative, a positive alternative,” said Price. He touted his reform as the “most comprehensive” alternative to Obamacare.

Price’s bill sets up a tax credit to help low-income individuals buy health insurance. It also helps people keep their insurance when they move across state lines, reforms the legal system to reduce doctors’ malpractice liability, and expands the use of Health Savings Accounts (HSAs), which are untaxed savings accounts people can use for their health costs.

Price’s bill also addresses the problem of preexisting conditions by allowing people to pool together to buy insurance. “It would solve overnight the problem,” he said.

Price’s plan “dramatically expands the utility of HSAs,” which increase the ability of people to save their own money, Roy said. But expanding a realm of untaxed saving is effectively a tax cut. “You have to pay for that somehow,” Roy said.

While Price’s bill reforms much of the healthcare system, two areas that go unaddressed comprehensively are the tax code’s treatment of health insurance and entitlements, especially Medicare and Medicaid.

All healthcare experts interviewed by the Washington Free Beacon said the first place to start in reforming America’s healthcare system is by reforming the tax code.

Currently health insurance provided by an employer is an untaxed benefit, meaning that there is a tremendous advantage to getting health insurance through work rather than on the individual market.

“The present system penalizes those who buy health insurance on their own,” said Chen. The current system makes it harder to jump between jobs, creating “job lock.”

Medicare is also in desperate need of reform, they said.

“You can’t fix the rest of healthcare without dealing with Medicare,” said Tom Miller, a healthcare expert at the American Enterprise Institute. Medicare pays for so much of total healthcare costs in America that the way that system functions impacts the rest of the healthcare system.

The various proposals all seek to give individuals control over their insurance, increasing competition among private insurance companies for people’s business. This competition would then drive down costs.[/quote]

forbes.com/sites/theapotheca … obamacare/

That’s setting the bar awfully low. How about as many as had it before?

The writer takes way too long to get to the meat, but finally:

[quote]While the plan would repeal Obamacare, it would preserve some of the law’s most popular features, such as its ban on lifetime limits on insurer payouts, and its requirement that insurers cover adult children younger than 27. It would replace Obamacare’s premium hike on young people, known as age-based community rating, with a more traditional 5:1 rating band.

It wouldn’t maintain Obamacare’s individual mandate, nor its requirement that insurers offer coverage to everyone regardless of pre-existing health conditions. Instead, the plan would require insurers to make offers to everyone who has maintained “continuous coverage,” while aiding states in restoring the high-risk pools that served those who insurers won’t otherwise cover. Subsidy-eligible individuals who failed to sign up for a plan would be auto-enrolled in one priced at the same level as the subsidy for which they qualified.

The proposal would do some things highly popular on the right. It would encourage medical malpractice reform by “adopting or incentivizing states to adopt a range of solutions to tackle the problem of junk lawsuits and defensive medicine.” It would strive to expand price transparency and the supply of physicians.

Means-tested tax credits for the uninsured, funded by the employer tax exclusion

Most importantly, the CBH plan would make substantial changes to the tax exclusion for employer-sponsored coverage, in order to fund subsidies for the uninsured. “Our proposal caps the tax exclusion for employee’s health coverage at 65 percent of an average plan’s cost” today, and then grows the cap at the rate of the Consumer Price Index—a common measure of inflation—plus one percent (CPI+1%).

The revenues gained from this change would then be used to offer tax credits for the uninsured, so long as their incomes were below 300 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL). Importantly, the subsidies are structured on a sliding scale so that those at 300% FPL get a smaller subsidy than those below 200% FPL. In addition, the subsidies increase as you get older; an individual aged 18-34 would get a subsidy of $1,560, whereas one aged 50-64 would get $3,720: 2.4 times what the young’uns get. The size of the subsidies would grow, again, at CPI+1%. (Obamacare offers subsidies to those below 400% of FPL.)[/quote]

Now the scary part:

I don’t like the sound of that.

More on the Tom Price plan, and also Phil Roe and Mike Lee:

americanthinker.com/2014/02/ … of_no.html

A movement among the states:

healthcarecompact.org/solution

[quote]Centralized planning of an industry that is this large and complex is not possible, and has never been successful in the history of mankind. By comparison, the US military “only” spends about $1 trillion and employs about 2.5 million people - and has the benefit of providing a public good, rather than a consumer service.

By pushing responsibility and authority down to the states, the problem becomes much more solvable. Many states have only a few million citizens, and there are dozens of developed countries in Europe and elsewhere who have effective regulatory regimes operating at this scale.[/quote]

healthcarecompact.org/compact

[quote]The Elements of the Health Care Compact

Pledge: Member states agree to work together to pass this Compact, and to improve the health care in their respective states.

Legislative Power: Member states have primary responsibility for regulation of all non-military health care goods and services in their state.

State Control: In member states, states can suspend federal health care regulations. Federal and state health care laws remain in force in a state until states enact superseding regulations.

Funding: Member states get an amount of money from the federal government each year to pay for health care. The funding is mandatory spending, and not subject to annual appropriations. Each state’s funding is based on the federal funds spent in their state on health care in 2010. Each state will confirm their funding before joining this Compact. This funding level will be adjusted annually for changes in population and inflation.

Commission: An advisory commission is created to gather and publish health care cost data, study various health care issues, and make non-binding recommendations to member states.

Amendments: Member states can amend this Compact with approval of the members, and no further Congressional consent is needed.

Withdrawal: Any member state can withdraw from this Compact at any time.
[/quote]

washingtonpost.com/politics/ … story.html

[quote]House Republican leaders are adopting an agreed-upon conservative approach to fixing the nation’s health-care system, in part to draw an election-year contrast with President Obama’s Affordable Care Act.

The plan includes an expansion of high-risk insurance pools, promotion of health savings accounts and inducements for small businesses to purchase coverage together.

The tenets of the plan — which could expand to include the ability to purchase insurance across state lines, guaranteed renewability of policies and changes to medical-malpractice regulations — are ideas that various conservatives have for a long time backed as part of broader bills.

But this is the first time this year that House leaders will put their full force behind a single set of principles from those bills and present it as their vision. This month, House leaders will begin to share a memo with members outlining the plan, called “A Stronger Health Care System: The GOP Plan for Freedom, Flexibility, & Peace of Mind,” with suggestions on how Republicans should talk about it to their constituents.[/quote]

Which narrative to believe here?

washingtonexaminer.com/team-boeh … le/2546853

So far, I can only believe my own anecdotal evidence as both and customer and employer in the US.

Nothing changed because the company was already buying the correct insurance. My personal insurance has also not changed in any form.

Let’s see about next year.

Obamacare’s approval rating is surging. Enrollment numbers surpassed expectations. None of the crazy gloom and doom “predicted” by the reich wing has come to pass. The stars haven’t fallen from the sky. The antichrist hasn’t revealed his horned head. The yoke of Stalinisn hasn’t befallen the US. Obamacare is a success and it’s popular.

Posted via Tapatalk on tiny smartphone keyboard. Expect typos.

Shit.

I just lost my insurance in the US. Have had it for years and was quite happy with it. Took care of me through several gut cancer operations, gallbladder and appendix removals, and several skin cancer treatments.

I can keep my insurance and my doctor? Yeah, right… :unamused:

Sorry, but I need to call horseshit on that

ACA at Age 4: More Disapproval than Approval

More people than ever hate it. It’s why Republicans are likely to take the Senate, its why Obama has pushed back so many of the dates for implanting the law.

[quote=“Mick”]Sorry, but I need to call horseshit on that

ACA at Age 4: More Disapproval than Approval

More people than ever hate it. It’s why Republicans are likely to take the Senate, its why Obama has pushed back so many of the dates for implanting the law.[/quote]

:laughing:

Horseshit. Propaganda. All the same thing.

Here’s more [color=#0000FF]reality[/color] for Chris:

[quote=“Rasmussen, on 7 April 2014”][color=#FF0000]
Unfavorable opinions of the new national health care law are at their highest level in several months, while the number who think the quality of care in this country will get worse is at its highest level in over three years.
[/color]
[/quote]

So, Chris, you got that [color=#FF0000]surging[/color] part correct. :roflmao: But, that’s all you got right!

This is funny, because you so often like to say:

:laughing: Thanks for the laughs, Chris! :bravo:

[quote=“Chris”]Obamacare’s approval rating is surging. Enrollment numbers surpassed expectations. None of the crazy gloom and doom “predicted” by the reich wing has come to pass. The stars haven’t fallen from the sky. The antichrist hasn’t revealed his horned head. The yoke of Stalinisn hasn’t befallen the US. Obamacare is a success and it’s popular.

Posted via Tapatalk on tiny smartphone keyboard. Expect typos.[/quote]

You are kidding, right?

[quote=“rowland”][quote=“Chris”]Obamacare’s approval rating is surging. Enrollment numbers surpassed expectations. None of the crazy gloom and doom “predicted” by the reich wing has come to pass. The stars haven’t fallen from the sky. The antichrist hasn’t revealed his horned head. The yoke of Stalinisn hasn’t befallen the US. Obamacare is a success and it’s popular.

Posted via Tapatalk on tiny smartphone keyboard. Expect typos.[/quote]

You are kidding, right?[/quote]

He’s not. His reality is different! :sunglasses:

So enrollment numbers aren’t higher than expected?

Answer: yes but (insert ever changing variable).

[quote=“Mucha Man”]So enrollment numbers aren’t higher than expected?

Answer: yes but (insert ever changing variable).[/quote]

No, you’re the one changing the variable here! :laughing:

Chris stated:

[quote=“Chris”]
Obamacare’s approval rating is [color=#FF0000]surging[/color]
.[/quote]

That’s what Mick and I have commented on. The approval surge.

There is a surge, indeed. But, the surge is in disapproval rather than approval.

P.S. I just knew you would come running to Chris’ defense… :laughing:

Well, Tigerman, I would have come running in defense of human rights, but I knew that Muzhaman was already there… and knowing Muzhaman is already there is just such a strong indication that human rights are being protected… why just ask Putin if you don’t believe me!!!

Obamacare popularity surging.

Up from 40% to 49%, and climbing. Now that people are actually using it, instead of simply listening to Republican liars lying about it.

*For the first time, the Washington Post-ABC News poll has found more Americans support Obamacare than oppose it. The poll, released Monday, the law’s enrollment deadline, found 49 percent of Americans support the law and 48 percent oppose it. It was the first time, dating back to August 2009, that support outweighed opposition in the poll."

talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/w … l-march-31

Facts. Try them sometime, Republicans.

How’s YOUR popularity rating, Fred?

I bet it is [color=#FF0000]gurgling[/color].

Really, well you should have been more specific. Don’t mock me because you’re message was so poorly expressed.

[quote]
P.S. I just knew you would come running to Chris’ defense… :laughing:[/quote]

You really shouldn’t stoop to implied homophobic slurs.