|
Yiggy posted:Maybe just me but this feels like a just-barely, seat of the pants victory for incrementalism and pragmatism. It got through the courts, is through early implementation and is somehow surviving its first serious threat of repeal or serious dismantling. People showed up and shouted to defend it and its holding on. And now there is a line to start fighting and pushing for a Public Option and more medicaid expansion. Put more money on the table like last time and let some states accept it and some turn it down, make any sort of dismantling which leaves Red states hosed my comparison even harder to sell. Kansas may expand medicaid this year. Yes, Brownbeckistan (the Kansas GOP is lobbying for Trump to appoint him ambassador to somewhere, anywhere, to get him out of the state so they can start fixing it).
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2017 23:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 08:56 |
|
|
Pizdec posted:Speaking as a European who is way out of the USPOL loop - How was the Trumpcare proposal different from the pre-Obamacare status quo? Its hard to say, but it might have offered a few more protections than pre-Obamacare (which was a shitshow), but it made other things like abortions more complex and harder to deal with (the Trumpcare literally had steps to make sure rebates you got could not go into accounts that could potentially pay for abortions). How the insurance companies responded would actually been a measurement if it was better or not. Private companies still have the biggest influence on US Healthcare.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2017 23:29
|
|
|
Lockback posted:Its hard to say, but it might have offered a few more protections than pre-Obamacare (which was a shitshow), but it made other things like abortions more complex and harder to deal with (the Trumpcare literally had steps to make sure rebates you got could not go into accounts that could potentially pay for abortions). How the insurance companies responded would actually been a measurement if it was better or not. Private companies still have the biggest influence on US Healthcare.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2017 23:32
|
|
|
EugeneJ posted:NY has this too called the Essential Plan: I'm pretty sure that is Medicaid. Minnesota has MinnesotaCare, which is Medicaid and extremely good. It even covers people who have long term chronic conditions.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2017 23:36
|
|
|
Lockback posted:No we do not, but MN does have an expanded medicaid called MNCare, but it is not available for everyone. Governor Dayton has proposed allowing everyone to buy in as a proper public option, but there's zero chance that makes it through a Republican controlled state legislature. Maybe in 2019. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 00:01
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/laurendezenski/status/845405796863225858 Do they smell blood in the water?
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 00:08
|
|
|
Xae posted:I'm pretty sure that is Medicaid. No, but it's confusingly similar. It would mostly cover childless non-disabled adults between 133%-200% of the Federal Poverty Level. Under 133% would be covered by Medicaid, along with different FPL cutoffs for children/disabled/parents. I suppose certain non-citizens under 133% also might go on this plan instead of Medicaid.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 00:08
|
|
|
Frankly I'm surprised it took this long. I'd think Warren would've been vocal for single-payer from the start.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 00:09
|
|
|
Rhesus Pieces posted:https://twitter.com/laurendezenski/status/845405796863225858 I mean, she'd have said that yesterday, a year ago, two years ago, and before she was elected.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 00:13
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:
Can someone please explain the context of this to me?
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 00:15
|
|
|
Mourne posted:Can someone please explain the context of this to me? House Democratic leadership's press conference after the failure of Trumpcare.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 00:19
|
|
|
Mourne posted:Can someone please explain the context of this to me? Well deserved gloating.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 00:25
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:I mean, she'd have said that yesterday, a year ago, two years ago, and before she was elected. Before she was elected she was a Republican.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 00:27
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/845415997557411840
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 00:27
|
|
|
A Profile In Courage https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/845409467911024640
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 00:38
|
|
|
I get that this is a troll amendment, but that wouldn't work at all. Your HSA just sees that you spent $x on a prescription and bills the claim, they don't look at all what the prescription is for.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 00:53
|
|
|
I think the thread subtitle should be renamed 'AHCA is DOA'. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 00:55
|
|
|
Subvisual Haze posted:I get that this is a troll amendment, but that wouldn't work at all. Your HSA just sees that you spent $x on a prescription and bills the claim, they don't look at all what the prescription is for. Yes but now democrats can campaign on that each of those Republicans voteed to subsidize viagra for sex offenders 
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 01:08
|
|
|
Teriyaki Koinku posted:I think the thread subtitle should be renamed 'AHCA is DOA'.  eta except in this case it really was DOA; ppaca, in contrast, has been with us for a while Red Dad Redemption fucked around with this message at 01:11 on Mar 25, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 01:09
|
|
|
Teriyaki Koinku posted:I think the thread subtitle should be renamed 'AHCA is DOA'. I prefer 'AHCA is FUKD'
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 01:18
|
|
|
I hope Paul Ryans next plan is to undo the delay on the Cadillac tax and allow everyone to behold ACA's true form and despair
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 01:32
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:I hope Paul Ryans next plan is to undo the delay on the Cadillac tax and allow everyone to behold ACA's true form and despair Yeah, that'll be sad. I currently pay exactly $0 for my company health care, I can't imagine that continues after the Cadillac tax
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 01:34
|
|
|
I'll weep a few crocodile tears for your struggle.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 01:40
|
|
|
Teriyaki Koinku posted:I think the thread subtitle should be renamed 'AHCA is DOA'. Trump's DNR for AHCA
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 01:50
|
|
|
I think a big reason why individual states haven't gone full public option is that they have to balance their budgets every fiscal period (except Vermont). So, if MN were funding a Public Option, and a major recession hit, the budget would get completely hosed. This already happens when automatic stabilizers kick on for unemployment benefits, food stamps, and things like that, but large portions of those costs are Federally backstopped. The PO would presumably swell with enrollees just in time for income tax and sales tax revenues to eat poo poo. MN can't run a big deficit to cover this, and can't print money either. So, Federal reform is needed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 02:15
|
|
|
I think any real fix will need to focus on controlling costs and expanding subsidies for the middle class. Letting people buy into medicare directly from their W2 should probably be the core tenant of any new solution. The only solution I can think of controlling costs beyond cutting drug prices would be creating lifetime expenditure limits on people above a certain age, or decreasing the amount of time it takes to study medicine which is extremely high in America compared to the ret of the developed world.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 02:16
|
|
|
ISeeCuckedPeople posted:I think any real fix will need to focus on controlling costs and expanding subsidies for the middle class. If the only person to bill was the Federal government, your doctor's office wouldn't need a four person "business office." Administrative costs of dealing with tons of different insurance companies and unique company forms, and having to deal with garbage like referrals, primary care, networks, claim denials, and on and on is a huge contributor to higher costs in America.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 02:33
|
|
|
All healthcare is DOA
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 02:37
|
|
|
ISeeCuckedPeople posted:I think any real fix will need to focus on controlling costs and expanding subsidies for the middle class. The federal government has lots of levers it can pull to affect prices but most of them require more spending. There's a reason most countries use price controls.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 02:44
|
|
|
ISeeCuckedPeople posted:The only solution I can think of controlling costs beyond cutting drug prices would be creating lifetime expenditure limits on people above a certain age, or decreasing the amount of time it takes to study medicine which is extremely high in America compared to the ret of the developed world. You basically just advocated for actual death panels. I think the head of the number 1 or number 2 health insurance firm said that any discussion on this matter needed to have Americans reckoning on how we approach end of life care...and how much we waste on it in futile attempts to keep people alive that have reached the end of the line. Nobody..and I do mean nobody..wants to talk about that. The second point means essentially breaking the AMA and that's going to be a tall friggen order. Most doctors spend their entire 20's getting to actually start their careers. You're going to have a lot of sore medical professionals that will push back on it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 02:48
|
|
|
Hey everyone, get a hot new look at this bill:  https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/676 The tax on unearned income is the best part.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 02:51
|
|
|
Grand Theft Autobot posted:I think a big reason why individual states haven't gone full public option is that they have to balance their budgets every fiscal period (except Vermont). I agree totally with your analysis. This was a big (and well-founded) fear with ColoradoCare. The budget for ColoradoCare was nearly 50% larger than the entire rest of the state budget combined.. A recession leading to reduced revenue or unforeseen expenses (such as uninsured or underinsured people now seeking out medical care, which was *not* addressed in the cost projection models) would lead very quickly to massive deficits in the state budget that can't simply be made up by cutting other state services, because the excess money simply wouldn't be there. Which would lead to either: ColoradoCare reducing coverage (voters disgruntled) or reducing reimbursement rates (hospitals lose tons of money) or raising revenue via higher taxes (in a hypothetical recession, and they have to be voted on...which isn't going to happen.) You can't deficit spend until the economy recovers like the federal government can. There was a very real chance that it would blow up state finances and spiral out of control. An untested state-only single-payer system was just too risky.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 03:13
|
|
|
I hope that if the Democrats somehow win the House with a comfortable margin in 2018 that they hold a press conference and say: "Yeah, you remember that Republican health car bill that everybody hated? We feel it was a real shame that constituents never got to see how their representatives would vote on it, so we're dropping it on the floor for a vote immediately following this conference. All the Democrats are voting against it, so it won't pass, but we feel it's important for people to know whether their representatives want to take away their health care. Bye, now. We're off to take a vote!"
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 03:20
|
|
|
Or they could do any one of a multitude of infinitely more useful things.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 03:32
|
|
|
The Phlegmatist posted:An untested state-only single-payer system was just too risky. This makes me wonder if Medicaid buy-ins are feasible. Start with people who want cheap insurance, use increased revenue for increased coverage, eventually start getting employers on board and now you're making progress toward a state-only UHC baseline with private supplemental policies on top. Would insurers like to shift the health insurance market toward lower revenue, higher margins and greater stability? They're the primary opposition. Accretionist fucked around with this message at 03:36 on Mar 25, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 03:33
|
|
|
The Phlegmatist posted:I agree totally with your analysis. This was a big (and well-founded) fear with ColoradoCare. The budget for ColoradoCare was nearly 50% larger than the entire rest of the state budget combined.. A recession leading to reduced revenue or unforeseen expenses (such as uninsured or underinsured people now seeking out medical care, which was *not* addressed in the cost projection models) would lead very quickly to massive deficits in the state budget that can't simply be made up by cutting other state services, because the excess money simply wouldn't be there. ColoradoCare would've been funded by a separate stream payroll tax administered jointly on employers and employees, no different than how medicare works and operates today.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 03:37
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:This makes me wonder if Medicaid buy-ins are feasible. You have just described the nightmare scenario of every insurance executive in America. That is precisely the boogeyman they fear every time a national discussion of health care policy comes around, and they have spent a GREAT deal of money to make it known that anyone who so much as suggests it will have them willing to prop up any and all primary challengers to them going forward. That poo poo would hit the American health insurance industry like Chixculub and kill the dinosaurs a hell of a lot faster this time around. A few descendants would make it through, much smaller and much less powerful, but you are not going to make any friends telling the CEO of AETNA "hey, only making one million a year instead of ten million a year would still make you pretty damned rich." You would demonstrably improve the lives of millions of people, mind, but nobody gets paid by the life saved.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 03:40
|
|
|
A public option represents something like a metastatic cancer for the health insurance industry, and if you understand that you understand why its an existential fight for them. People would be driven to a public option every single time those shitheads jacked up premiums, left a market, sold people terrible policies, etc etc The health insuranace industry has also been shooting themselves in the same god drat foot for decades and no one would shed a single tear if they were wiped from the surface of the Earth. Everyone hates them and they know it. If people are given the option to jump ship from Aetna to Medicare they'll do it en masse
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 03:49
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Deadspin/status/845453917064441857 Allll this ad money is now worthless.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 03:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 08:56 |
|
|
Office Pig posted:https://twitter.com/Deadspin/status/845453917064441857 There are going to be some very confused low-information voters that aren't sure who to blame for their deductibles
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2017 03:53
|
|