The two senators who will likely decide fate of ObamaCare repeal

[txradioguy]

In-state competition. Get rid of government mandates and you open up the market to innovation and competition in insurance marketing. New companies will spring up under this freer regulatory environment. There will be plans to suit all budgets and all health conditions, unlike Ocare’s one size fits all mandates. It’s called the free market.

Additional money saving will come from the lower cost of state administration and innovations found in many state capitals.

You and a few others here need to come to the realization that the Federal government will never give up it's control over the states on healthcare.

It doesn't even do that in this bill.

[Smokin Joe]

The truth is today, 435+100+1=536 persons hold the next solution in their hands.

It is messy. It will not totally satisfy you. The clock will not be turned back in time, no matter how much anyone might wish it to be so.

You and I each have influence on just 4 of those people, namely the President, your two senators, and one House Rep.

I am grateful for progress, to remedy matters, to the extent it is feasible.

Unlike some, I do not run about jousting at windmills. Or waiting for perfect solutions in the future.

Be pragmatic, be reeeliastic, he sez.

Here is your realistic: $28,000.00 for the cheapest plan for a family of 4 on the exchanges in my state. For someone who makes the industry average annual income of $71K, that is over 39% of their income for insurance NOT FOR MEDICAL CARE which is subject to the $14,000.00 deductible, plus copays, etc.

That isn't realistic, but that is what we have.


It was realistic enough to give the GOP control of the House and Senate and the Presidency that they were going to "Repeal it root and branch".

Failure to do that, and I will not vote to reelect anyone.

[ConservativeGranny]

I respect your opinions but I don't see that passing this bill would hurt us.  Why do people think Obamacare will collapse of its own weight.  It has been an utter failure but it hasn't collapsed yet.

I think we should take what is offered in this bill and continue our efforts to get through to the Congress critters.

Just a few posts back you said that "They feel no obligation to the people." Then what good would it be to "continue efforts" to get through to them? Please explain because I'm confused as to why one would keep beating a dead horse.

I don't even have to read this bill. I won't support anything that isn't a full repeal as promised. I am offended that they have the nerve to call it a "repeal". It's insulting.

[XenaLee]

Montana and Alaska have two of the highest "Native American" population percentages in the country.

Not understanding what your point is. 

[truth_seeker]

Be pragmatic, be reeeliastic, he sez.

Here is your realistic: $28,000.00 for the cheapest plan for a family of 4 on the exchanges in my state. For someone who makes the industry average annual income of $71K, that is over 39% of their income for insurance NOT FOR MEDICAL CARE which is subject to the $14,000.00 deductible, plus copays, etc.

That isn't realistic, but that is what we have.


It was realistic enough to give the GOP control of the House and Senate and the Presidency that they were going to "Repeal it root and branch".

Failure to do that, and I will not vote to reelect anyone.

What do you believe will be the outcome in your state, if this bill passes and goes into effect? Next year, two years-three years out?

Versus what do you believe the outcome will be if the bill fails to pass and go into effect, in future years?

You want to go on paying those rates for several more years, in hopes the system will collapse, and bring lower rates?

[ConservativeGranny]

Be pragmatic, be reeeliastic, he sez.

Here is your realistic: $28,000.00 for the cheapest plan for a family of 4 on the exchanges in my state. For someone who makes the industry average annual income of $71K, that is over 39% of their income for insurance NOT FOR MEDICAL CARE which is subject to the $14,000.00 deductible, plus copays, etc.

That isn't realistic, but that is what we have.

I agree with you. We have insurance through my husband's work (not Obamacare). We do have to pay around $250 per month for it but the deductibles and co-pays are very high. We put out over $16000 for medical, dental and prescriptions last year. And that was not an unusual year. It's like that pretty much every year. We are not wealthy. Just an average middle class family. It's killing us. We can't save anything and we already cut back on some meds and avoid going to the doctor if we can. And since the government got involved half the time you can't get in to see a doctor. I have COPD and was sick almost the entire winter with one upper respir. infection after another and I never got in to see my Pulmonary M.D. Everything was done via email and over the phone. We have seen doctors leaving the profession. Especially difficult to get in to see specialists. My husband has a medical condition that can affect his eyes and when he had a flair up this past winter he couldn't get an appointment with his opthamologist.

Appointments have been cancelled many times because "they are short staffed". My dad had a broken vertebra for 6 months and they wouldn't order an MRI for him to diagnose it. Things are not good out there. Our healthcare has gone downhill very rapidly since Obamacare. People are not only suffering financially because of it but the quality of healthcare is not up to what we were used to 10 years ago.

There is no easy answer but the band aid needs to be ripped off. This can't be "fixed" in increments.


It was realistic enough to give the GOP control of the House and Senate and the Presidency that they were going to "Repeal it root and branch".

Failure to do that, and I will not vote to reelect anyone.

[XenaLee]

I still can't grasp the reality that the Democrats 'got away' with destroying the US health industry.  Oh sure....they lost the last election (narrowly)....but other than that loss, they still got away scott free with the destruction they forced upon innocent, hard-working Americans.   It's heartbreaking to hear about someone we actually know and the struggles they are dealing with, ongoing.

I knew this nation was in deep 'stuff' when the nation did not rise up against the Democrats...when they forced this crap through against the will of most Americans.  When We, the People didn't stand up and put them in their place (permanently out of office and/or in prison), I knew then that we were just about done (toast).  We have been fundamentally transformed by leftists into a nation of sheeple....too accustomed to government control.  That pot is just about at a rolling boil....

and it's way too late to jump out now.

[Sanguine]

I've learned a lot on this thread.  I've learned that many so-called conservatives are really spineless jellyfish willing to accept whatever lies our masters in Washington tell us because they are afraid of having to take care of themselves for a change.  Afraid to take a risk in doing the right thing.  Afraid to tell those corrupt scalawags inside the Beltway to go take a leap. 

Maybe you are getting what you deserve.  Sadly that leaves me and a few others also getting what you deserve. 

[Smokin Joe]

Not understanding what your point is.

Section 128: Enhance FMAP for Medical Assistance to Eligible Indians
• Provides for a 100% FMAP rate for amounts expended as medical assistance for services
provided by any provider under a Medicaid state plan to an individual who is a member
of an Indian tribe and eligible for assistance under a Medicaid state plan.

"Indian Health" is supposed to be part of the treaty packages provided under the BIA, US Dept. of the Interior.

[Emjay]

Just a few posts back you said that "They feel no obligation to the people." Then what good would it be to "continue efforts" to get through to them? Please explain because I'm confused as to why one would keep beating a dead horse.

I don't even have to read this bill. I won't support anything that isn't a full repeal as promised. I am offended that they have the nerve to call it a "repeal". It's insulting.

That's up to you, of course, but this bill does some things I consider worthwhile and therefore I support it.

I'm not sure if they're calling it a repeal or not.  Obviously it is not, but it is a small step in the right direction.

The alternative is to pass nothing at all and I'm not sure the benefit in that.

[RoosGirl]

I've learned a lot on this thread.  I've learned that many so-called conservatives are really spineless jellyfish willing to accept whatever lies our masters in Washington tell us because they are afraid of having to take care of themselves for a change.  Afraid to take a risk in doing the right thing.  Afraid to tell those corrupt scalawags inside the Beltway to go take a leap. 

Maybe you are getting what you deserve.  Sadly that leaves me and a few others also getting what you deserve.

That's okay.  They don't mind letting you help pay for what they deserve.

[Mom MD]

That's okay.  They don't mind letting you help pay for what they deserve.

I get to pay 2 ways.  First as a consumer of health care.  Then as a provider I get less and less compensation for more and more work with continually more government regulations on what I can do and how I need to document. At least 1/2 my day is spent documenting so I can get paid and meet government regulations. Then the 3rd slap in the face is Trump saying he wants to raise tax rates on high income earners, so hubby and I keep even less of what we make.  As soon as the kids are out of grad school, I'm retiring. And good riddance. At least that way I only get shafted once....

[Emjay]

I get to pay 2 ways.  First as a consumer of health care.  Then as a provider I get less and less compensation for more and more work with continually more government regulations on what I can do and how I need to document. At least 1/2 my day is spent documenting so I can get paid and meet government regulations. Then the 3rd slap in the face is Trump saying he wants to raise tax rates on high income earners, so hubby and I keep even less of what we make.  As soon as the kids are out of grad school, I'm retiring. And good riddance. At least that way I only get shafted once....

So, do you think this bill will be beneficial at all ... or not?  I totally hear you on the problems and the paperwork involved.  It's horrible.

But what's your opinion on the bill?

[Mom MD]

So, do you think this bill will be beneficial at all ... or not?  I totally hear you on the problems and the paperwork involved.  It's horrible.

But what's your opinion on the bill?

I honestly don't know enough of the fine details and unintended consequences. BUT I have never known legislation layered on other legislation to decrease complexity.  I think total repeal is the only way to go.  Not only are the exchange policies very expensive, but once someone gets in the hospital they cover almost nothing. Patients would be truly better with no insurance at all, because at least then we can get them charity care.

[Smokin Joe]

I honestly don't know enough of the fine details and unintended consequences. BUT I have never known legislation layered on other legislation to decrease complexity.  I think total repeal is the only way to go.  Not only are the exchange policies very expensive, but once someone gets in the hospital they cover almost nothing. Patients would be truly better with no insurance at all, because at least then we can get them charity care.

Considering our medical care costs were running about 8K a year, including an ER visit or two, versus 28K for insurance and a 14K deductible on that 'cheap' plan, It has proven far cheaper to have no insurance and just pay the bill.

[Mom MD]

Considering our medical care costs were running about 8K a year, including an ER visit or two, versus 28K for insurance and a 14K deductible on that 'cheap' plan, It has proven far cheaper to have no insurance and just pay the bill.

And you get better coverage.  Most facilities are also willing to negotiate a cash price that is much less than what they would bill insurance.  Obamacare is a total failure.  But then it was designed to fail in such a way that the only recourse would be singer payer.  Thanks to the spineless republicans, the plan is succeeding in a big way

[RoosGirl]

I get to pay 2 ways.  First as a consumer of health care.  Then as a provider I get less and less compensation for more and more work with continually more government regulations on what I can do and how I need to document. At least 1/2 my day is spent documenting so I can get paid and meet government regulations. Then the 3rd slap in the face is Trump saying he wants to raise tax rates on high income earners, so hubby and I keep even less of what we make.  As soon as the kids are out of grad school, I'm retiring. And good riddance. At least that way I only get shafted once....

I'm curious if it's possible for you as a doctor to provide care only to cash paying patients?

[Smokin Joe]

I'm curious if it's possible for you as a doctor to provide care only to cash paying patients?

Me, too!

[XenaLee]

"Indian Health" is supposed to be part of the treaty packages provided under the BIA, US Dept. of the Interior.

Ok, but why only those two states?  There are Native American populations all over the nation.  My ancestors (half of them) were relocated to Oklahoma, for instance.

Thx for the splain, btw.

[Smokin Joe]

Ok, but why only those two states?  There are Native American populations all over the nation.  My ancestors (half of them) were relocated to Oklahoma, for instance.

Thx for the splain, btw.

Not sure how OK is affected. Alaska, New Mexico, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Montana, and North Dakota, are the top 6 in terms of American Indian population, Montana and Alaska were mentioned. Murkowski is from AK, not sure if someone from MT was involved in crafting this or not, nor how the other states are affected. Reservation counties tend to vote overwhelmingly Democrat in this neck of the woods.

[ConservativeGranny]

I get to pay 2 ways.  First as a consumer of health care.  Then as a provider I get less and less compensation for more and more work with continually more government regulations on what I can do and how I need to document. At least 1/2 my day is spent documenting so I can get paid and meet government regulations. Then the 3rd slap in the face is Trump saying he wants to raise tax rates on high income earners, so hubby and I keep even less of what we make.  As soon as the kids are out of grad school, I'm retiring. And good riddance. At least that way I only get shafted once....

That's exactly what has been happening. My husband and I lost 2 specialists and a GP due to Obamacare. Our GP said he could treat patients the way he is mandated to do so under the new healthcare system and two specialists retired early because they said it wasn't worth it to stay in practice. This is what many of us feared would cause shortages of good doctors. I'm sure many young people who were considering the medical field now have to wonder if the cost of their education and the many years they have to put into it will be worth it.

[Jazzhead]

I spoke to my sister yesterday,  and had to counsel her out of a panic about receiving a modest inheritance from my dad - she was afraid if she took the money she wouldn't qualify for her ObamaCare subsidy.   Like many,  she lost her health insurance when it was outlawed by O-Care, and had to take an O-Care policy that was far more expensive except for the subsidy.  But she's on the cusp that if she makes more money, she loses the subsidy. 

Here are a few excerpts from this morning's lead editorial in the WSJ about Graham Cassidy:

The bill would devolve ObamaCare funding to the states, which could seek waivers from the feds to experiment within certain regulatory boundaries, and it also repeals the individual and employer mandates and the medical device tax. . . . [A] state that receives a waiver from ObamaCare's regulations must show plans that retain access to "adequate and affordable" coverage with pre-existing conditions.  ObamaCare's rules are not the only way to do this, despite the claims of Jimmy Kimmel.   The ACA's price restrictions have in practice degraded the quality of care for the ill and sent insurers shopping for healthy patients who are more profitable. 

  States could set up high risk pools, for example.  These pools subsidize care for those who need costly treatment without concealing the expense across healthy patients, who may drop coverage if they can't afford it. . . . 

That's the bind my sister is in!

The shame is that many Democrats once liked a federalist solution to health care, and Lilndsay Graham was one of those who worked with them.   In 2007, he and Wisconsin Democrat Russ Feingold proposed the State-Based Health Reform Act that would have given states even more freedom than Graham Cassidy.  But these days Democrats fear that state laboratories would discredit the command and control approach to health care that they hope will lead to single payer.   

The choice Republicans face isn't between Graham Cassidy or some bipartisan beau ideal.  Their choice is to pass their own bill, which now means Graham-Cassidy, or fail again, and cede the health care advantage to the single payer wing of the Democratic Party. 

This is our last, best hope, folks.    I wish Rand Paul would gain some perspective at what's at stake.   

[txradioguy]

I spoke to my sister yesterday,  and had to counsel her out of a panic about receiving a modest inheritance from my dad - she was afraid if she took the money she wouldn't qualify for her ObamaCare subsidy.   Like many,  she lost her health insurance when it was outlawed by O-Care, and had to take an O-Care policy that was far more expensive except for the subsidy.  But she's on the cusp that if she makes more money, she loses the subsidy.   

And yet you want to continue to keep her at the mercy of the Federal Government scared to death at any moment she's going to loose her free government cheese.

How sad.

[Jazzhead]

And yet you want to continue to keep her at the mercy of the Federal Government scared to death at any moment she's going to loose her free government cheese.

How sad.

No I want her to have options for affordable insurance that fit her circumstances - like she did before.

 I'm for Graham-Cassidy as a step in the right direction;  you, by opposing it in the name of ideological purity,  effectively support the status quo.     

[driftdiver]

No I want her to have options for affordable insurance that fit her circumstances - like she did before.

 I'm for Graham-Cassidy as a step in the right direction;  you, by opposing it in the name of ideological purity,  effectively support the status quo.   

@Jazzhead
What you're for is to have the government take money from other people and give it to your sister.  If she's getting money then why can't she go look at the open market and get some insurance that isn't through O-care?  They are out there.

Graham-Cassidy will let the Republicans claim victory without actually doing anything.