Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > General Forum > ObamaCare
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

ObamaCare Discuss As Trump Threatens Obamacare, Bipartisan Group of House Members Plots a Fix at the General Forum; Originally Posted by Mikeyy This is todays far right. It bugs them that two sides might work together. You already ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 08-02-2017, 12:44 PM
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,387
Thanks: 7,960
Thanked 6,634 Times in 4,015 Posts
Default Re: As Trump Threatens Obamacare, Bipartisan Group of House Members Plots a Fix

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikeyy View Post
This is todays far right. It bugs them that two sides might work together.
You already said that, post 4. Repeating it does not make it any less wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 08-02-2017, 01:02 PM
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,387
Thanks: 7,960
Thanked 6,634 Times in 4,015 Posts
Default Re: As Trump Threatens Obamacare, Bipartisan Group of House Members Plots a Fix

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShivaTD View Post
The CSR was an anticipated part of Obamacare. It was understood that the sick, those with pre-existing conditions, would be the first to sign-up for insurance under Obamacare. It would take years for the Individual Mandate to eventually coerce enough "healthy" people to enroll to offset the high costs of those with pre-existing conditions. The CSR, that promised up to 80% of insurance companies losses, were so that the insurance companies could keep premiums low that encouraged more healthy younger people to sign-up for insurance.

The GOP has failed to provide the 80% funding to offset the losses to the insurance companies for covering sick people and instead has only provided about 12% (as I recall). Not only that they filed a lawsuit to prevent the CSR payments in an effort to destroy Obamacare.

Those unreimbursed losses have driven up the insurance premiums that discourage healthy people from signing up. The increased insurance premiums require larger subsidies for those that sign up under the individual mandate. The cost of the increased subsidies, as pointed out, cost billions of dollars more than simply funding the CSR's that are temporary while the insurance pool expands to cover those with high cost medical conditions.

Trump voters believed Trump's promise that he had a plan to replace Obamacare with another health insurance program that would provide superior insurance to more Americans at less cost. Trump was lying to the voters of course because he's never had a plan that would provide superior insurance to more people at less cost. Republicans, for seven years, promise to "repeal and replace" Obamacare with something better and they've never produced any proposal superior to Obamacare. Of course the GOP's problem is that Obamacare was the "Republican" (conservative) proposal for health care from the 1990's and the Democrats stole it from them in 2009-2010.

If Trump and/or the GOP had something superior to Obamacare then Democrats, including former President Obama, have already stated they'd support it.

So we have Trump lies and GOP lies when it comes to Obamacare. When are Republicans going to simply admit they've been conned and lied to?
Trump voters voted Trump in the vain hope that OCare would be repealed.
We admit we've been conned and lied to. I doubt anybody thought otherwise. That's why nobody has received their $2500 check. We are also aware that all the 60 repeal bills are still on the table and only need to be dusted off and passed. So both sides are lying. We knew that.

Stating and doing are two different things. Where is the Democrat plan? Even if you are a minority of one, you can still submit bills.

The bolded is nonsense. From the beginning to the now famous $2500 statement, OCare has been touted as saving money. But now your argument is that the whole purpose of the 80% subsidy was to con the gullible into believing that they would save money? And Trumpsters are the ones being conned? Librologic at its best.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jimbo For This Useful Post:
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 08-02-2017, 01:26 PM
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Tennessee
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,971
Thanks: 9,073
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,327 Posts
Default Re: As Trump Threatens Obamacare, Bipartisan Group of House Members Plots a Fix

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShivaTD View Post
The GOP has failed to provide the 80% funding to offset the losses to the insurance companies for covering sick people and instead has only provided about 12% (as I recall).
Well, then that is 12 percent too much, in my opinion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShivaTD View Post
Trump voters believed Trump's promise that he had a plan to replace Obamacare with another health insurance program that would provide superior insurance to more Americans at less cost. Trump was lying to the voters of course because he's never had a plan that would provide superior insurance to more people at less cost. Republicans, for seven years, promise to "repeal and replace" Obamacare with something better and they've never produced any proposal superior to Obamacare. Of course the GOP's problem is that Obamacare was the "Republican" (conservative) proposal for health care from the 1990's and the Democrats stole it from them in 2009-2010.
Sadly, I will have to give the Democrats some credit: They have done a marvelous job of convincing a majority of Americans that healthcare insurance is a right--not a privilege--even though it is nowhere mentioned in our Constitution (unless one thoroughly contorts the so-called "General Welfare Clause").

This blog says it pretty well, I think: https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/...lth-insurance/
__________________
"In his second inaugural address, [Franklin D.] Roosevelt sought 'unimagined power' to enforce the 'proper subordination' of private power to public power. He got it…"—George Will, July 8, 2007
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 08-02-2017, 01:41 PM
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,387
Thanks: 7,960
Thanked 6,634 Times in 4,015 Posts
Default Re: As Trump Threatens Obamacare, Bipartisan Group of House Members Plots a Fix

Quote:
Originally Posted by pjohns View Post
Well, then that is 12 percent too much, in my opinion.



Sadly, I will have to give the Democrats some credit: They have done a marvelous job of convincing a majority of Americans that healthcare insurance is a right--not a privilege--even though it is nowhere mentioned in our Constitution (unless one thoroughly contorts the so-called "General Welfare Clause").

This blog says it pretty well, I think: https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/...lth-insurance/
The general welfare clause was never meant to override personal responsibility. General welfare means having a road to get to the hospital. Personal responsibility means getting out your checkbook once you get there.

There are those who argue that we all pay anyway, so what's the harm in paying a little more so 32 million won't lose their free healthcare. Obviously overlooking or ignoring that 32 million on a government welfare program is way too many and should be reduced.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to jimbo For This Useful Post:
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 08-03-2017, 08:28 AM
GetAClue's Avatar
Master
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Northern Ohio
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,553
Thanks: 2,103
Thanked 1,304 Times in 744 Posts
Default Re: As Trump Threatens Obamacare, Bipartisan Group of House Members Plots a Fix

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShivaTD View Post
The CSR was an anticipated part of Obamacare. It was understood that the sick, those with pre-existing conditions, would be the first to sign-up for insurance under Obamacare. It would take years for the Individual Mandate to eventually coerce enough "healthy" people to enroll to offset the high costs of those with pre-existing conditions. The CSR, that promised up to 80% of insurance companies losses, were so that the insurance companies could keep premiums low that encouraged more healthy younger people to sign-up for insurance.

The GOP has failed to provide the 80% funding to offset the losses to the insurance companies for covering sick people and instead has only provided about 12% (as I recall). Not only that they filed a lawsuit to prevent the CSR payments in an effort to destroy Obamacare.

Those unreimbursed losses have driven up the insurance premiums that discourage healthy people from signing up. The increased insurance premiums require larger subsidies for those that sign up under the individual mandate. The cost of the increased subsidies, as pointed out, cost billions of dollars more than simply funding the CSR's that are temporary while the insurance pool expands to cover those with high cost medical conditions.

Trump voters believed Trump's promise that he had a plan to replace Obamacare with another health insurance program that would provide superior insurance to more Americans at less cost. Trump was lying to the voters of course because he's never had a plan that would provide superior insurance to more people at less cost. Republicans, for seven years, promise to "repeal and replace" Obamacare with something better and they've never produced any proposal superior to Obamacare. Of course the GOP's problem is that Obamacare was the "Republican" (conservative) proposal for health care from the 1990's and the Democrats stole it from them in 2009-2010.

If Trump and/or the GOP had something superior to Obamacare then Democrats, including former President Obama, have already stated they'd support it.

So we have Trump lies and GOP lies when it comes to Obamacare. When are Republicans going to simply admit they've been conned and lied to?
Please do not lump me in with the crowd believing that the GOP or Trump should replace Obamacare. I have NEVER advocated for that. My position is, and always had been, that the ACA should be repealed, PERIOD! IT is the progressives in the GOP and the media that have perpetuated the notion that the GOP should have to replace the ACA if it was repealed.
__________________
To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead - Thomas Paine
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to GetAClue For This Useful Post:
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 08-03-2017, 09:04 AM
Conservative Sage
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 15,391
Thanks: 8,229
Thanked 8,927 Times in 5,513 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to AZRWinger
Default Re: As Trump Threatens Obamacare, Bipartisan Group of House Members Plots a Fix

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShivaTD View Post
The CSR was an anticipated part of Obamacare. It was understood that the sick, those with pre-existing conditions, would be the first to sign-up for insurance under Obamacare. It would take years for the Individual Mandate to eventually coerce enough "healthy" people to enroll to offset the high costs of those with pre-existing conditions. The CSR, that promised up to 80% of insurance companies losses, were so that the insurance companies could keep premiums low that encouraged more healthy younger people to sign-up for insurance.

The GOP has failed to provide the 80% funding to offset the losses to the insurance companies for covering sick people and instead has only provided about 12% (as I recall). Not only that they filed a lawsuit to prevent the CSR payments in an effort to destroy Obamacare.

Those unreimbursed losses have driven up the insurance premiums that discourage healthy people from signing up. The increased insurance premiums require larger subsidies for those that sign up under the individual mandate. The cost of the increased subsidies, as pointed out, cost billions of dollars more than simply funding the CSR's that are temporary while the insurance pool expands to cover those with high cost medical conditions.

Trump voters believed Trump's promise that he had a plan to replace Obamacare with another health insurance program that would provide superior insurance to more Americans at less cost. Trump was lying to the voters of course because he's never had a plan that would provide superior insurance to more people at less cost. Republicans, for seven years, promise to "repeal and replace" Obamacare with something better and they've never produced any proposal superior to Obamacare. Of course the GOP's problem is that Obamacare was the "Republican" (conservative) proposal for health care from the 1990's and the Democrats stole it from them in 2009-2010.

If Trump and/or the GOP had something superior to Obamacare then Democrats, including former President Obama, have already stated they'd support it.

So we have Trump lies and GOP lies when it comes to Obamacare. When are Republicans going to simply admit they've been conned and lied to?
The first paragraph is a revelation. If the CSR was to anticipate insurers losses, why is it open ended? It is a bottomless pit of subsidies to make up for incompetent Federal meddling in the insurance market. But the real kicker is the admission the individual mandate is a mechanism of government coercion to force healthy people to subsidize the indigent sick. If we just prop up Obamacare with an ocean of more taxpayer cash eventually in some golden future it will coerce enough people into subsidizing health insurance for all.
__________________
The Democrat's strategy for the Trump Presidency is the same one used by Stalin's secret police chief "show me the man and I will show you the crime."
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to AZRWinger For This Useful Post:
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 08-03-2017, 11:28 AM
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,387
Thanks: 7,960
Thanked 6,634 Times in 4,015 Posts
Default Re: As Trump Threatens Obamacare, Bipartisan Group of House Members Plots a Fix

Quote:
Originally Posted by GetAClue View Post
Please do not lump me in with the crowd believing that the GOP or Trump should replace Obamacare. I have NEVER advocated for that. My position is, and always had been, that the ACA should be repealed, PERIOD! IT is the progressives in the GOP and the media that have perpetuated the notion that the GOP should have to replace the ACA if it was repealed.
These are the same progressive who voted 60 times to repeal and never to replace. And that was all the House Republicans. They all need to go.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to jimbo For This Useful Post:
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 08-03-2017, 11:37 AM
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,387
Thanks: 7,960
Thanked 6,634 Times in 4,015 Posts
Default Re: As Trump Threatens Obamacare, Bipartisan Group of House Members Plots a Fix

Quote:
Originally Posted by AZRWinger View Post
The first paragraph is a revelation. If the CSR was to anticipate insurers losses, why is it open ended? It is a bottomless pit of subsidies to make up for incompetent Federal meddling in the insurance market. But the real kicker is the admission the individual mandate is a mechanism of government coercion to force healthy people to subsidize the indigent sick. If we just prop up Obamacare with an ocean of more taxpayer cash eventually in some golden future it will coerce enough people into subsidizing health insurance for all.
Shiva uses really big words in an attempt to make really little points. But claiming that CSR was nothing more than a con game to entice people to pay other peoples bills is a long stretch.

And Shiva claims that those of us who actually understood what was going on were the ones being conned.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to jimbo For This Useful Post:
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 08-04-2017, 09:04 AM
Conservative Sage
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 15,391
Thanks: 8,229
Thanked 8,927 Times in 5,513 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to AZRWinger
Default Re: As Trump Threatens Obamacare, Bipartisan Group of House Members Plots a Fix

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbo View Post
Shiva uses really big words in an attempt to make really little points. But claiming that CSR was nothing more than a con game to entice people to pay other peoples bills is a long stretch.

And Shiva claims that those of us who actually understood what was going on were the ones being conned.
Obamacare is a con game to make A pay for B's health insurance. As senior consultant Jonathan Gruber bragged about the Cadillac tax the American people are too stupid to realize Obamacare makes them pay for sick people.

The CSR doesn't directly make us pay for other people's bills. It uses tax dollars to insulate insurers from the incompetence of Federal meddling in the insurance market. It is necessary because Obamacare regulation is toxic to insurers by design.
__________________
The Democrat's strategy for the Trump Presidency is the same one used by Stalin's secret police chief "show me the man and I will show you the crime."
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 08-04-2017, 09:15 AM
ShivaTD's Avatar
Progressive Libertarian
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Immigrant to Arizona
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,029
Thanks: 1,433
Thanked 2,157 Times in 1,702 Posts
Default Re: As Trump Threatens Obamacare, Bipartisan Group of House Members Plots a Fix

Quote:
Originally Posted by pjohns View Post
Well, then that is 12 percent too much, in my opinion.
The CSR was anticipated transitional funding because it was well known that those with pre-existing conditions and those with health issues would be the first to sign up for insurance. It would take years before the individual mandate would expand the insurance pool until it was large enough to offset the costs.

The "insurance pool" is what needs to be understood. It takes a lot of people not filing claims to cover the costs of those that file claims. I'm just making an educated guess but I would suggest that it would take about ten years of people obtaining health insurance through the exchanges before there would be enough people in the insurance pool to cover the costs of the early sign-ups, specifically those with pre-existing conditions, that did require high expenditures.

The alternative would have been to set the insurance premium rates high enough to cover those with pre-existing conditions but that's self-defeating. No one would have been able to afford the insurance.

The government is actually saving money by funding the CSR as opposed to funding subsidies for the higher premiums that result of the CSR isn't funded.

There's a more important factor to be considered IMHO. The Congress and the President are supposed to be trying to make our government work based upon the law and are not supposed to be trying to break it. The ACA included the CSR payment because it was an anticipated requirement to make Obamacare work. By refusing to fund the CSR the GOP is intentionally attempting to make Obamacare fail. One could argue that to intentionally attempt to make a federal law fail is a violation of the oath of office.


Quote:
Originally Posted by pjohns View Post
Sadly, I will have to give the Democrats some credit: They have done a marvelous job of convincing a majority of Americans that healthcare insurance is a right--not a privilege--even though it is nowhere mentioned in our Constitution (unless one thoroughly contorts the so-called "General Welfare Clause").

This blog says it pretty well, I think: https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/...lth-insurance/
My personal belief differs from both the Democrats and the Republicans but it should also be noted that the link provides an invalid argument because it only addresses the opinion of the Federalists (Madison and Hamilton) and not the opinions of the Anti-Federalists that were just as instrumental in the creation of the United States. Remember that the Bill of Rights was an Anti-Federalist argument that Madison finally had to agree was necessary. We can also note that Republicans also violate the "Federalist" position on immigration (no authority to limit immigration enumerated in the Constitution) and voting (not limited to US citizens but instead granted to all "people" under Article I and the 17th Amendment to the Constitution).

When it comes to the "general welfare" the Constitution clearly establishes in Article I Section 8 that the federal government is responsible for the "general welfare of the states" and not the "people" of the United States. The responsibility for the "general welfare of the people" is a responsibility of the States and not the Federal government.

Because our nation is built upon commerce and health care is a result of commerce the people, all of which engage in commerce, have a "right to health care" and it's the State's responsibility to ensure that right. The problem arises when the State refuses to fulfill it's responsibility to the People of the State and health care was one of those failures.

The federal government can provide for the "welfare of the States" by providing funding for state programs such as education (where states fail to fully fund their educational needs) or in the case of Medicaid that's a state run program providing health insurance. The funding is for the benefit of the State's Welfare and the State then uses the funding to help provide for the People's Welfare.

Obamacare was set up based upon this criteria because it provided additional funding to Medicaid, a state run health care program for the poor, as well as establishing that the states were responsible for setting up their own insurance exchanges. All the federal government was supposed to do is provide funding for the states.

Unfortunately there were states that refused their responsibility when it came to both the expansion of Medicaid as well as setting up their own insurance exchanges. By default they abdicated their responsibility to the federal government specifically related to the exchanges. Basically those states that refused to set up their own insurance exchanges delegated their authority to the federal government.

Obamacare also failed when it came to the expansion of Medicaid because it didn't fully fund the expansion indefinitely. It was the future financial responsibility of the states, that they should have assumed under the Constitution, that allowed them to reject the expansion.

It is interesting to me that based upon the delegation of powers and responsibilities between the federal government and the state government only Massachusetts came close to achieving that with Romneycare. If all of the states had Romneycare then the ACA would have been fundamentally unnecessary. It was only the abdication of responsibility for the Welfare of the People by the states that resulted in the necessity for Obamacare.
__________________
I CAN EXPLAIN IT TO YOU
BUT I CAN'T UNDERSTAND IT FOR YOU
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
bipartisan, fix, group, house, members, obamacare, plots, threatens, trump

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0