This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Trumpcare is DOA......these folks do not know what they are doing

Go to page : Previous  1, 2

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 2 of 2]

polecat wrote:Trump University didn't make it into March Madness but its founder has probably crashed a few Sweet Sixteens.

View user profile
CBO says million's will lose coverage:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/cbo-millions-would-lose-coverage-under-gop-healthcare-plan/ar-AAogTew

The Congressional Budget Office projects that 14 million people will lose coverage by 2018 under the Republican ObamaCare replacement bill.


The long-awaited analysis from the nonpartisan congressional scorekeeper is sure to shake up the debate over the measure, which is already facing sharp criticism from conservatives and many centrist Republicans.

The GOP bill repeals ObamaCare's subsidies to buy coverage, replacing them with smaller tax credits, as well as the law's Medicaid expansion after 2019. Both moves were expected to lead to coverage losses.

Republicans had expected that the CBO would show Americans losing coverage, and preemptively went on the offensive against the nonpartisan agency, whose director, Keith Hall, who was appointed by the GOP.

White House press secretary Sean Spicer last week argued CBO was "way off" in its ObamaCare projections.

"If you're looking to the CBO for accuracy, you're looking in the wrong place," he said.

White House budget director Mick Mulvaney, meanwhile, argued Sunday on ABC's "This Week" that the CBO shouldn't even try to analyze the bill.

"Sometimes we ask them to do stuff they're not capable of doing, and estimating the impact of a bill of this size probably isn't the best use of their time," he said.

--This breaking news report will be updated.

View user profile
ppaca wrote:
PkrBum wrote:You'll know when or if they're actually making progress for the populace... big pharma, hospital, and insurance corporations will start screaming bloody murder and flooding the media with propaganda.

Big and smaller hospital's already are, but is it propaganda? Don't think so.

I meant the large hospital corporations... the ones for years that lobbied for regulations to kill competition.

View user profile
ppaca wrote:Yes, I am alive.

Linda,

I would imagine when you file your taxes you will have to prove you have health insurance to get a tax credit. Now in your scenario it is very possible for the IRS to refund the $3000.00

If the way you all are looking at this comes to pass then it's nothing but a subsidy.

Glad to see you, ppaca. Not sure what you mean, "in my scenario," how the IRS could refund $3,000, when the person only owed/paid $1,000. They could refund $1,000. The balance of the $4,000 'tax credit', if paid (by some agency) via check would clearly be, as you say, "nothing but a subsidy" in the amount of $3,000.

View user profile
Well let's say a person 60 years old, under the bill, will receive $4000 at the end of the year in tax credit that was meant to help with their health insurance for that year and they owed $1000 in taxes they would therefore receive refund of $3000.00, the IRS would keep the $1000 they owed. It is a subsidy only the the back end instead of the front. The 60 year old in this scenario if low income would be losing about $6000 in subsidy under ACA. Around 100 - 200% of federal poverty level. These people won't be able to afford health insurance for their needs. Maybe a HSA compatible plan with a $10000 to $20000 deductible. Still doesn't meet their needs and would not have the income to actually set up an HSA.

View user profile
PkrBum wrote:
ppaca wrote:
PkrBum wrote:You'll know when or if they're actually making progress for the populace... big pharma, hospital, and insurance corporations will start screaming bloody murder and flooding the media with propaganda.

Big and smaller hospital's already are, but is it propaganda? Don't think so.

I meant the large hospital corporations... the ones for years that lobbied for regulations to kill competition.

Isn't the AHA comprised of large hospital corporations?

View user profile

http://www.salon.com/2017/03/13/cbo-blows-up-trumpcare-gops-health-care-plan-will-leave-tens-of-millions-uninsured/?source=newsletter


The Congressional Budget Office just dropped a train on the Republicans’ Obamacare “replacement” bill. According to the budget office, the American Health Care Act would, if enacted, result in 14 million people losing insurance coverage next year. The office’s long-term projections for insurance coverage were awful as well: By 2026, the number of people losing insurance would rise to 24 million. Per the office, if Obamacare were to be left to its own devices, 28 million people would lack insurance coverage in 2026. Under the American Health Care Act, that number would be a whopping 52 million.

The Congressional Budget Office score is going to cause major problems for the GOP leadership’s plan to jam this terrible bill through Congress, which explains why top Republicans moved to pre-empt the fallout by trashing the agency’s credibility and making wild claims about all the wonderful things the AHCA would accomplish.

Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price flat-out lied about the AHCA’s impact on coverage and the affordability of insurance. Over the weekend Price said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that “nobody will be worse off financially” relative to his or her situation under the ACA and that he believes coverage will actually increase under the Republican bill. The budget office’s score just rammed a dagger through both those claims: It found that premiums on the individual market would be higher in the short term relative to what they would be under Obamacare.

As I and many others have pointed out, the Republican bill would make the lives of older, sicker people on the individual market considerably worse; their premium subsidies would be slashed as much as 80 percent while insurers would be allowed to charge them higher premiums. The Wall Street Journal reported today that “a 62-year-old currently earning about $18,000 a year could pay nearly $20,000 annually to get health-insurance coverage under the House GOP plan — compared with about $760 a year that person would owe toward premiums under the ACA.”

The legislation would also halt Obamacare’s expansion of Medicaid and slash funding for the program. Expanded Medicaid accounts for a large portion of the coverage gains under the Affordable Care Act. Restructuring Medicaid’s funding as intended by the AHCA would guarantee that people would be dropped from the rolls. As the budget office noted, the spike in the number of people left uninsured under the AHCA would stem “in large part from changes in Medicaid enrollment.”

While Price making wild promises about what the Republican plan will do, House Speaker Paul Ryan was busily talking up the “freedom” aspect of the bill. “Freedom” in Ryan’s telling is the ability to use your money to buy whatever you desire. That’s not freedom so as much as it is “being rich.” Part of Ryan’s message is that the AHCA offers people the “freedom” to go without insurance and slip into medical bankruptcy.

Asked on CBS News how many people the Republican plan would cover, Ryan declined to provide a number, explaining that the bursting geysers of freedom that will erupt following the bill’s passage make it impossible to do any estimates. “I can’t answer that question,” Ryan said. “It’s up to people.”

Ryan actually admitted that the AHCA can’t compete with Obamacare’s individual mandate when it comes to expanding coverage, but countered by saying, “People are going to do what they want to do with their lives because we believe in individual freedom in this country.” That includes the “freedom” to go without health insurance. “You get it if you want it,” Ryan said. “That’s freedom.”

There’s a lot to process here, but let’s zero in on this “freedom” to go uninsured that Ryan is extolling, as it actually undermines the case for the AHCA. As I’ve written before, there is a de facto mandate within the Republican health care bill: It’s just weaker than Obamacare’s mandate and won’t really work all that well. Under the AHCA, you have the “freedom” to go uninsured, but if you go more than two months without coverage you are subjected to a 30 percent penalty rate by insurers when you do try to buy a plan.

Look at it this way: The Republicans’ health care reform bill punishes you for trying to buy insurance if you’ve previously been uninsured. The Congressional Budget Office found that while this penalty rate might encourage some people to purchase insurance in 2018, it will have the opposite effect in the long term. “In most years after 2018,” the budget office noted, “roughly 2 million fewer people would purchase insurance because they would either have to pay the surcharge or provide documentation about previous health insurance coverage.” Basically, people will just wait until they’re sick to buy coverage and end up paying more for it.

Promising people the moon when it comes to health care is, to put it mildly, stupid. The GOP knows this, given the fact that it reaped substantial political rewards from attacking Democrats on their unmet health care promises. But Republican leaders now find themselves caught between their campaign pledges to eliminate the Affordable Care Act, the expectation to maintain the ACA’s insurance coverage gains, and the difficulty of crafting legislation that can actually pass Congress.

The Congressional Budget Office report makes clear how aggressively mendacious the Republicans’ health care strategy is. It also showed that the American Health Care Act is an absurd and dreadful piece of legislation that cannot, by any reasonable standard, be called a “replacement” for the Affordable Care Act.

*************

View user profile
I have been gone all day and like to watch Vice News, and although I have quit watching Fox and Msnbc, I still watch CNN and will try to understand the CBO scoring.

View user profile
ppaca wrote:
PkrBum wrote:
ppaca wrote:
PkrBum wrote:You'll know when or if they're actually making progress for the populace... big pharma, hospital, and insurance corporations will start screaming bloody murder and flooding the media with propaganda.

Big and smaller hospital's already are, but is it propaganda? Don't think so.

I meant the large hospital corporations... the ones for years that lobbied for regulations to kill competition.

Isn't the AHA comprised of large hospital corporations?

Yes... I think my first post in this exchange pointed to that.

View user profile
The health care system in this country is just a mess because we try to view it as a profit/loss business sort of system, which is just not working. I recently watched Michael Moore's movie "Where to Invade Next". As we all know, the US is the only developed country that does not have universal  health care. Other countries have better outcomes for less money but not us. We have to try and make money on absolutely everything.

According to reports the health care sector is about 20% of our economy. We have doctors and nurses, hospital administrators and pharmaceutical companies that need to be paid. There are people trained to code for the billing etc. In any sane country all these objective facts would be taken into consideration and a decision based on reality would be made to methodically transition from our failed system (higher costs, poorer outcomes). But we are not governed by reason but by interest groups who donate to politicians and are represented by lobbyists. Until the public figures out how to effectively apply pressure on Washington to change our whole system I think we are doomed to seeing people charged more and more for less and less.

The Indivisible group has awakened many and their tactics are working to change some minds in DC. I hope this continues.

View user profile
The core issue... and the reason that Obamacaid and this tweak will fail... is that they are insurance based solutions and the insurance lobby owns the big players. That means we the consumer will lose. A real solution would be a doctor and patient based system with open competition across state lines. The progressive inclusions like pre existing conditions, adult kids... etc can have a place in there as long as people aren't also forced to carry services that they don't need or want. In conclusion... lol... we aren't ever going to get an excellent system while the politicians are in the medical and insurance lobby pockets. Ryan is clearly not representing our best interest and if he continues this path he needs to go... pronto.

View user profile

Sponsored content


View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 2 of 2]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum