The Freedom Caucus’s new health care demand: let insurers charge sick people more
So, it is sort of hard to figure out a good answer here. I don't want to have to pay for the cancer treatment of someone who smoked 2 packs a day for 40 years, or for some womans pregnancy issues. I think their real issue is Obamacare is just looting a bunch of people to pay for a few, and the Republican plan is "screw them, it's their issue" (and I lean more in that direction). The real problem is that they BOTH miss the mark. It apprars there needsto be some catastrophic program that kicks in at a certain level, and fund it off some current tax rate, with a consequent cut in spending to compensate. At least that way the issue is addressed (somewhat), the looting is sort ofg restricted, and people would still get the health care. You also have to factor in the wild costs and just willy nilly "it's expensive and goes up 20% a year" stories from the whole medical world, and require some proof of costs going up before you can raise your rates. But neither side is going to have something that either works, or is reasonable, both plans do some major screwing of someone...seems to be the new political standard....I would love to see Copngress actually have to go buy their own plans themselves and then I bet they would have a much better idea of fixing it...
Defund all federal programs that do things not covered in the constitution and let the local govt and states deal with it just as the constitution intended. Since the states cannot print fiat and indebt the people forever, its likely that at least some of the state and local governments will devise a better free market solution that stops the ever skyrocketing cost of medical services.
The constitution does not allow this and the people at the local and state level can contractually agree to provide this if they wish. The result will be a testing process that will create multiple solutions that will better serve the people that create them, and since the states cannot create money tokens from nothing.they will also create solutions that are more economically sound or the programs won't survive.
If socialist people decide to remain in a state where they are looted then they deserve to be looted. Since they haven't yet learned the lesson of economics from the soviets and Venezuela, they must learn it the hard way.
Propaganda can't overcome economic reality forever. Instead there will be a breakup of those states along socialist vs free market lines with the wise producers choosing free markets.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...
(PS - if you want to you can read Rep Ted Poe's cop-out on why he left the Freedom Caucus over the ACHA here: https://townhall.com/columnists/congr...
Some people do abuse themselves, but others just have the luck of the draw, with genetic disorders, weak immune systems, and exposure to harmful working environments. How to deal fairly with the ill and elderly without telling them to expect bankruptcy as a natural course of events is a challenge. There are doctors and nurses who contribute time to free clinics, and religious organizations like the Salvation Army that help people with addiction and mental disorders, but their capacity is limited. The trick is to prevent the government-insurers cabal from leveraging taxpayer empathy to extort more money supposedly on behalf of the ill and elderly.
It's about what happened BEFORE the AMA took over...
1. He refused to blame anyone. What he pointed out repeatedly was that the bill was unpopular and didn't do what he (and many others of the Caucus) had been elected to do: repeal Obamacare.
2. That he was still open to working with people on a patient-centered bill. Though the specifics weren't mentioned in this interview, I have heard other Freedom Caucus members as well as Jordan offer up specifics in line with what you mention above. That he was not asked about specific alternatives in this interview does not mean they were not discussed, however.
3. Yes, he did blame the process. He blamed the lack of debate, the refusal to accept amendments, the lack of testimony, and the rush all as contributing factors.
This is not to take away from your proposals, only to rebut the first point you attempted to make: that the Freedom Caucus was not promoting fundamental reform. Their first priority is repeal - which must happen before anything else is considered.
However...
As the ACA is currently written, it delegates effective lawmaking power to the Director of Health and Human Services. We saw that with Sibelius (and Obama himself with the waivers). That being the case, any reforms are subject to override and veto by the Director of HHS as he/she sees fit. That authority MUST be revoked for any other measure to stand with certainty. IMO, repeal is not negotiable.
Alan Grayson was half right. The proper plan is, "Don't get sick." Because you don't have to get sick.
This is all about snobby sick liberals that want a private insurance card (for cheap) rather than have to go to the public clinics that take Medicaid. It's the same as the "EBT Cards" for food stamps that have a VISA symbol to kind of look like the beneficiary is actually paying for their groceries, until you are stuck in line watching the clerk fill out the miles of paperwork on every item they are buying. IMHO, that's the real reason Amazon is going to dominate groceries now... people are sick of watching the baby-mommas picking up 6 bags of Cheetos and a 12-pack of Mountain Dew from the convenience store with a 600% markup using other people's tax dollars.
Even if you are old and in a care home, after self-paying in private care for 30 months, Medicaid will pick up the cost, regardless of the person's assets - although their income (retirement/disability/investment) needs to be contributed.
Call it something else if we want, but the mechanism is already there, and always has been there. This is just whining and crying.
I have a brother-in-law that I have been friends with for 20 years that is dying of liver & esophageal cancer at 40 years old. Love the guy, and my heart goes out to him, but he's on Medicare and Permanent Social Security + Disability and got an early (full) retirement from his construction union. He's doing fine, he has a catastrophic illness and California State Disability Income (SDI) kicked-in on day-one when he was diagnosed and couldn't work to be on chemo, and the case worker at the hospital worked his file through Social Security and Medicare's "Compassionate Claims" process - he's going to die anyway, the reality is, he's eligible for a crummy couple of years of retirement while trying to stay alive a little longer.
These programs have always been there, but does take a little bit of reading & writing ability and some basic understanding of government to navigate and get a claim approved.
We don't need to fix "stupid" by having 20 different programs that do the same thing.
Also, I think that the allopathic, AMA cabal should take the hit when they screw up...which is just about everything they do to you.
The whole system needs to be Honest, integrated and Ethical.
I will not hold my breath though...
As we age, we all need more medical treatment. Seniors already pay higher premiums. If we are all to pay for insurance based purely on our own healthcare needs, there would be no need for insurance at all.
The bottom line is that spreading the risk and cost over the whole pool makes the cost of health insurance less expensive for everyone.
Tort Reform would be a big step, eliminating huge judgements against providers, and allowing doctors to stop practicing defensive medicine by ordering every test and procedure under the sun, lest something be missed and they get sued for malpractice. But tell that to the trial lawyers.
The reality is that man does very little that does not involve making a profit. Medicine hasn't been a philanthropic enterprise since doctors made house calls, and accepted chickens for payment.
Even though I have worked in the field I don't know what the answer is. And yet I believe that an attitude adjustment on everyone's part is needed. Docs who spend up to 12 years or more to get their credentials need to get over the idea that being a doctor entitles them to Country Club living, a Mercedes Benz, a summer home, and private schools for the kids. Patients need to understand that not all outcomes are good, or work, that doctors are human beings and not perfect, and that a bad outcome doesn't mean that they just hit the lottery. Providers need to be able to stop overcharging some patients to pay for others, and that their new building doesn't have to be a Ritz hotel. And government needs to fully fund programs AT COST rather than passing mandates requiring services to be provided, and then reimbursing providers at 30 cents on the dollar.
However I am afraid I will never see any of these things in my lifetime. As my grandmother used to say, "Life isn't fair. You need to get used to it, and take your lumps."