I think the GOP has said repeal **AND REPLACE ****** They could have helped those who needed help without disrupting all the rest who were, by and large, satisfied with the insurance they had, and that was the majority of Americans. Anyone who believed that this would work has a “pie in the sky” mentality.Obamacare obviously needs to be improved. But Republicans offer only one solution which is total repeal and that would take us back to where we were before with millions of people being without any insurance at all and insurance companies denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions.
Don’t bet the farm.This will loose the election for Hillary.
Medicare Is Not “Bankrupt”Are you aware that Medicare is fiscally insolvent already? It costs ten times as much as the politicians told us it would when it was passed. Do you really think we can pay for 18% of the GDP with a 2.9% tax on earned income with a 3.8% on higher incomes(above $200k for singles and $259k for married couples)?
Claims by some policymakers that the Medicare program is nearing “bankruptcy” are highly misleading. Although Medicare faces financing challenges, the program is not on the verge of bankruptcy or ceasing to operate. Such charges represent misunderstanding (or misrepresentation) of Medicare’s finances.
Medicare’s financing challenges would be much greater without the health reform law (the Affordable Care Act, or ACA), which substantially improved the program’s financial outlook. Repealing the ACA, a course of action promoted by some who simultaneously claim that the program is approaching “bankruptcy,” would worsen Medicare’s financial situation.
The 2016 report of Medicare’s trustees finds that Medicare’s Hospital Insurance (HI) trust fund will remain solvent — that is, able to pay 100 percent of the costs of the hospital insurance coverage that Medicare provides — through 2028. Even in 2028, when the HI trust fund is projected for exhaustion, incoming payroll taxes and other revenue will still be sufficient to pay 87 percent of Medicare hospital insurance costs.[1] The share of costs covered by dedicated revenues will decline slowly to 79 percent in 2040 and then rise gradually to 86 percent in 2090. This shortfall will need to be closed through raising revenues, slowing the growth in costs, or most likely both. But the Medicare hospital insurance program will not run out of all financial resources and cease to operate after 2028, as the “bankruptcy” term may suggest.
cbpp.org/research/health/medicare-is-not-bankruptThe 2028 date does not apply to Medicare coverage for physician and outpatient costs or to the Medicare prescription drug benefit; these parts of Medicare do not face insolvency and cannot run short of funds.
Especially since most people have employer provided health insurance and do not rely on Obamacare.Don’t bet the farm.
That is an inaccurate representation, Trump etal has said repeal and replace, not go back to what it was before.Obamacare obviously needs to be improved. But Republicans offer only one solution which is total repeal and that would take us back to where we were before with millions of people being without any insurance at all and insurance companies denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions.
Medicare is always being negotiated with the providers and the insurance companies. It isn’t like hospitals can charge whatever they want. If they can’t cover them, they can always refuse to accept all Medicare patients.Are you aware that Medicare is fiscally insolvent already? It costs ten times as much as the politicians told us it would when it was passed. Do you really think we can pay for 18% of the GDP with a 2.9% tax on earned income with a 3.8% on higher incomes(above $200k for singles and $259k for married couples)?
That’s the point. Replace with WHAT?That is an inaccurate representation, Trump etal has said repeal and replace, not go back to what it was before.
No, congress didn’t get to read ACA before they passed it. A bi-partisan effort would yield very different results.That’s the point. Replace with WHAT?
People forget that McCain also ran a healthcare reform campaign. Chances are his healthcare plan would have would up the same way because they would have had the same Congress.
Maybe without the taxes, though.
Not necessarily better though. As it was the House-written version and the Senate-written version were two different animals but the House was forced to accept the Senate bill or there would be no healthcare reform, something which would have humiliated Obama completely. But he wasn’t blameless in the process.No, congress didn’t get to read ACA before they passed it. A bi-partisan effort would yield very different results.
The number of people without insurance today is exactly the same as it was before Obamacare.Obamacare obviously needs to be improved. But Republicans offer only one solution which is total repeal and that would take us back to where we were before with millions of people being without any insurance at all and insurance companies denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions.
Medicare rationing has already begun. In fact, Medicare reimbursements for chemo drugs are less than the costs of the drugs themselves, let alone the costs to the physicians to administer the chemo and treat the patient. In fact, oncology practices have to limit the number of patients who are only on Medicare because they will go bankrupt if they don’t. Medicare is being subsidized by the patients with private insurance and those with gap insurance.Or how about Medicare for all? What’s wrong with Medicare which is single payer system for people over 65 which has been quite successful and is generally fairly popular. Why not just expand Medicare to everyone of all ages?
So you admit there will be rationing, and still want govt-run healthcare?Medicare is always being negotiated with the providers and the insurance companies. It isn’t like hospitals can charge whatever they want. If they can’t cover them, they can always refuse to accept all Medicare patients.
Now we see Obamacare supporters trying to pretend that the GOP is also to blame for this trainwreck, because McCain MIGHT have supported something like it (he actually wouldn’t and didn’t, he supported more modest measures). The actual truth is that this monstrous law was forced upon the US by ONLY the DNC and Obama. And ONLY the DNC and Obama get blamed for it.That’s the point. Replace with WHAT?
People forget that McCain also ran a healthcare reform campaign. Chances are his healthcare plan would have would up the same way because they would have had the same Congress.
Maybe without the taxes, though.
I hope you realize your link actually doesn’t prove your point. It admits that one part of Medicare is already depleting the trust funds it has to keep operating, and will have to begin rationing in a few years (2028 is laughably rosy prediction). Secondly, it claims that the other parts of Medicare “can’t” go bankrupt. This is a lie. They don’t have a magical money tree to fund the increasing costs that are spiraling out of control. There will be two options, either dramatically increase taxes, borrow even more unsustainable debt, or increase rationing.
Blameless???Not necessarily better though. As it was the House-written version and the Senate-written version were two different animals but the House was forced to accept the Senate bill or there would be no healthcare reform, something which would have humiliated Obama completely. But he wasn’t blameless in the process.
If we had Medicare for all, people could still buy private insurance to supplement it if they can afford to do so. But I think that we should have a baseline of healthcare for everyone. It’s not right that many people before Obamacare had no insurance at all and there are still many poor people in some states who have no insurance because those states have refused to expand Medicaid.Medicare rationing has already begun. In fact, Medicare reimbursements for chemo drugs are less than the costs of the drugs themselves, let alone the costs to the physicians to administer the chemo and treat the patient. In fact, oncology practices have to limit the number of patients who are only on Medicare because they will go bankrupt if they don’t. Medicare is being subsidized by the patients with private insurance and those with gap insurance.
If you make it Medicare for all, there is no more subsidizing, so rationing will increase tremendously.
So you admit there will be rationing, and still want govt-run healthcare?
I’ll never understand why people think adding massive levels of government bureaucracy onto something will bring down the cost of that thing.If we had Medicare for all, people could still buy private insurance to supplement it if they can afford to do so. But I think that we should have a baseline of healthcare for everyone. It’s not right that many people before Obamacare had no insurance at all and there are still many poor people in some states who have no insurance because those states have refused to expand Medicaid.
Where people have choices, then costs and efficacy improve,Blameless???
Why use that word? He’s COMPLETELY to blame for Obamacare, along with the DNC. Trying to shuffle blame off on the claim that the House was forced to accept the Senate bill is ignoring that the PEOPLE of the US voted SPECIFICALLY to stop either bill from passing! The state of Massachusetts voted in a GOP senator to try and stop this travesty.
Perhaps if Obama and the DNC had actually listened to the people, we wouldn’t have this trainwreck.
Quit trying to deflect blame for this dumpster fire from Obama or the DNC. They own it.
This is one area where republicans are total hypocrites. One cannot complain about single payer and then support medicare, there is no way that is logically consistent.Or how about Medicare for all? What’s wrong with Medicare which is single payer system for people over 65 which has been quite successful and is generally fairly popular. Why not just expand Medicare to everyone of all ages?
At least the Republicans want to keep Medicare Advantage plans, where private companies compete for us old people. Obama wanted to end or reduce those options. I would prefer even less government involvement, but sometimes you have to compromise for what is possible. It is the same principle we have to use on the issue of abortion, where we limit the damage when we cannot get everything we want.This is one area where republicans are total hypocrites. One cannot complain about single payer and then support medicare, there is no way that is logically consistent.
Medicare was rammed down my throat.This is one area where republicans are total hypocrites. One cannot complain about single payer and then support medicare, there is no way that is logically consistent.