• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

GOP may delay Obamacare replacement for years

The right voted how many dozens of times to repeal Obamacare- now that they can be successful, they behave like cowards?

How predictable. Too bad their constituents won't wise up and realize (what they obviously do) that Obamacare is actually much better than nothing.
 
MaggieD said:
Large deductibles help no one. Those large deductibles and large co-pays let only the upper middle class access good care...if they're sick. A $5000 deductible per person in a family of four is back-breaking.
Click to expand...

MaggieD said:
What fly is in YOUR ointment today? Premium cost and deductibles are issues. What's your deductible? There ARE no low deductibles if I understand it correctly. My cousin, 61, and her husband, 58, just saw their premium raise from $1400 to $2400 a month for an $8000 deductible policy. That's $8000 for EACH of them. They switched to another policy that will cost them $2200 for the same coverage. Could YOU afford that? And what do you think their premium would be if theirmdeductible were $2000 a year??
Click to expand...

Maggie, your obedient narrative against Obamacare went from petty (nancy was snooty) to hypocritical and of course it's anecdotal (my cousin Betty Lou pays X dollars a month). 6 years into Obamacare and 3 years into the exchanges, you still don't know that the poorest people get subsidies for the copays and deductibles. Anyhoo, what makes your obedient narrative hypocritical is that conservatives didn't care about people who had no healthcare coverage because of cost before Obamacare. And that includes middle class people who couldn't afford the premiums. And you don't care about the people in red states where Medicaid wasn't expanded. Yea, those people have no problem with copays and deductibles because they have no coverage. that alone makes your narrative flamingly hypocritical.

Your posts only prove when conservatives have to choose between narrative and integrity, they always choose integrity.
 
Absentglare said:
The right voted how many dozens of times to repeal Obamacare- now that they can be successful, they behave like cowards?

How predictable. Too bad their constituents won't wise up and realize (what they obviously do) that Obamacare is actually much better than nothing.
Click to expand...

The idea that they're going to put themselves into the position of a) taking away 20-30 million people's health insurance and b) starting a massive legislative battle over a hypothetical replacement plan going into a presidential election year (2020) is ludicrous.

They boxed themselves in such that they have to do something this year. But the reality, which they recognize, is that they can't really do anything. So it makes sense that the approach they settle on would be to do nothing but try and look like they've done something. And by the time the three year window is up they'll need to delay or cancel entirely their time-lapse repeal.

The challenge is that in the meantime they'll inject so much uncertainty into a sector that's been re-organizing itself for the past seven years to meet the imperatives of the ACA that it's hard to tell exactly what the outcome of their posturing and games will actually be.
 
Vern said:
Maggie, your obedient narrative against Obamacare went from petty (nancy was snooty) to hypocritical and of course it's anecdotal (my cousin Betty Lou pays X dollars a month). 6 years into Obamacare and 3 years into the exchanges, you still don't know that the poorest people get subsidies for the copays and deductibles. Anyhoo, what makes your obedient narrative hypocritical is that conservatives didn't care about people who had no healthcare coverage because of cost before Obamacare. And that includes middle class people who couldn't afford the premiums. And you don't care about the people in red states where Medicaid wasn't expanded. Yea, those people have no problem with copays and deductibles because they have no coverage. that alone makes your narrative flamingly hypocritical.

Your posts only prove when conservatives have to choose between narrative and integrity, they always choose integrity.
Click to expand...

Why do you assume you know me? If you did, you would know that I completely supported Obamacare and, in fact, debunked death panel claims and many if the other nonsense claims made by the right. I completely disagreed with the Dems' heavy-handedness. Thought that was small-minded. But they wanted all of the credit. So now? They must accept all of the blame.

I have no narrative. And to discredit subjective ridiculous. The left's insistence to ignore subjective is part of the reason they lost the presidency and continue to lose seats in congress. You don't LISTEN.

You think you need to remind me the poorest get subsidies. Such a foolish assumption. All subsidies stop at combined income of $65,000. How many people do you know who can afford the $2200 my cousin pays on $65,000 a year? Their premium is not somehow higher. It's based on age. They make more than $65,000 so there is no subsidy available to them. People cannot afford it! What is so difficult to understand about that?

Do you pay for your own health insurance? I seriously doubt it. What's your premium? What's your deductible? What are your co-pays? What is your age? Will you answer me? Do you even know? Or does your employer subsidize it so that you don't even know the answers?

I venture that it's YOU who has the narrative...whatever that even means.
 
Absentglare said:
The right voted how many dozens of times to repeal Obamacare- now that they can be successful, they behave like cowards?

How predictable. Too bad their constituents won't wise up and realize (what they obviously do) that Obamacare is actually much better than nothing.
Click to expand...

That's obviously not true. Obamacare hurt more people than it helped that's the very definition of doing nothing being better.
 
MaggieD said:
Why do you assume you know me? If you did, you would know that I completely supported Obamacare and, in fact, debunked death panel claims and many if the other nonsense claims made by the right. I completely disagreed with the Dems' heavy-handedness. Thought that was small-minded. But they wanted all of the credit. So now? They must accept all of the blame.

I have no narrative. And to discredit subjective ridiculous. The left's insistence to ignore subjective is part of the reason they lost the presidency and continue to lose seats in congress. You don't LISTEN.

You think you need to remind me the poorest get subsidies. Such a foolish assumption. All subsidies stop at combined income of $65,000. How many people do you know who can afford the $2200 my cousin pays on $65,000 a year? Their premium is not somehow higher. It's based on age. They make more than $65,000 so there is no subsidy available to them. People cannot afford it! What is so difficult to understand about that?

Do you pay for your own health insurance? I seriously doubt it. What's your premium? What's your deductible? What are your co-pays? What is your age? Will you answer me? Do you even know? Or does your employer subsidize it so that you don't even know the answers?

I venture that it's YOU who has the narrative...whatever that even means.
Click to expand...

Maggie, its Vern, narrative is all he does. Every post.
 
Americans ought to expect that the repeal & replace, or substantially amend process will take a great deal of time.
 
MaggieD said:
What fly is in YOUR ointment today? Premium cost and deductibles are issues. What's your deductible? There ARE no low deductibles if I understand it correctly. My cousin, 61, and her husband, 58, just saw their premium raise from $1400 to $2400 a month for an $8000 deductible policy. That's $8000 for EACH of them. They switched to another policy that will cost them $2200 for the same coverage. Could YOU afford that? And what do you think their premium would be if their deductible were $2000 a year??
Click to expand...

I have a high deductible plan ($5k IIRC) because my health care costs are low. If I have the misfortune of getting sick, I will have to pay out of pocket up to the deductible. Then next year, Ill get a plan with a low deductible. Here in NY State, there are plans that have $0 deductibles with an Out of Pocket max of $2000. My premium has actually gone down slightly since ACA took effect. If your cousin is having a different experience, it is due to the circumstances in their state. Its not because of ACA. After all, it is not like health care insurance was cheap before ACA

My guess, Sangha, Is that you don't buy your own individual coverage..,that you get it through your employer. That puts you beyond understanding the problems of the self-employed. You probably don't even know how much your insurance costs. If I'm wrong, please detail your costs, deductibles and copays. You ought to be able to do that in one sentence.
Click to expand...

I am self employed and buy my own individual coverage without any subsidies. My premium is less than $500/mo, my deductible is about $5K,and co-pays depend on the service. My Out of Pocket Max is under $8K

Obamacare is not the answer. It needs fixing. Dump it? Replace it? Tweak it? It remains to be seen which alternative is viable. And smarter people than us will make those decisions. AND THEN!! We can argue about how wrong they are. Right?
Click to expand...

The no answer the repubs have is not the answer either and experience indicates the repubs have *NO* alternative.

And it wont be smarter people than us who will make those decisions; It will be politicians.

But since I answered your questions about my coverage, perhaps you can answer a question of mine - How long should it take the republicans to do their job and come up with a plan? Its been 6 years since ACA passed, and decades since health coverage became a public issue.
 
MaggieD said:
Why do you assume you know me? If you did, you would know that I completely supported Obamacare and, in fact, debunked death panel claims and many if the other nonsense claims made by the right. I completely disagreed with the Dems' heavy-handedness. Thought that was small-minded. But they wanted all of the credit. So now? They must accept all of the blame.

I have no narrative. And to discredit subjective ridiculous. The left's insistence to ignore subjective is part of the reason they lost the presidency and continue to lose seats in congress. You don't LISTEN.

You think you need to remind me the poorest get subsidies. Such a foolish assumption. All subsidies stop at combined income of $65,000. How many people do you know who can afford the $2200 my cousin pays on $65,000 a year? Their premium is not somehow higher. It's based on age. They make more than $65,000 so there is no subsidy available to them. People cannot afford it! What is so difficult to understand about that?

Do you pay for your own health insurance? I seriously doubt it. What's your premium? What's your deductible? What are your co-pays? What is your age? Will you answer me? Do you even know? Or does your employer subsidize it so that you don't even know the answers?

I venture that it's YOU who has the narrative...whatever that even means.
Click to expand...

If their premiums are $2200/month on a $65k/yr income, they qualify for a hardship exemption and do not have to buy insurance. Or they can get catastrophic coverage and open an HSA.
 
Taylor said:
Agreed. Even if we throw medicare recipients into the same bin, it's still far fewer people "insured" than supporters predicted at a much greater cost than supporters predicted.
Click to expand...

Aside from the fact that everything you said is wrong, everything you said is true
 
sangha said:
I have a high deductible plan ($5k IIRC) because my health care costs are low. If I have the misfortune of getting sick, I will have to pay out of pocket up to the deductible. Then next year, Ill get a plan with a low deductible. Here in NY State, there are plans that have $0 deductibles with an Out of Pocket max of $2000. My premium has actually gone down slightly since ACA took effect. If your cousin is having a different experience, it is due to the circumstances in their state. Its not because of ACA. After all, it is not like health care insurance was cheap before ACA



I am self employed and buy my own individual coverage without any subsidies. My premium is less than $500/mo, my deductible is about $5K,and co-pays depend on the service. My Out of Pocket Max is under $8K



The no answer the repubs have is not the answer either and experience indicates the repubs have *NO* alternative.

And it wont be smarter people than us who will make those decisions; It will be politicians.

But since I answered your questions about my coverage, perhaps you can answer a question of mine - How long should it take the republicans to do their job and come up with a plan? Its been 6 years since ACA passed, and decades since health coverage became a public issue.
Click to expand...

sangha said:
If their premiums are $2200/month on a $65k/yr income, they qualify for a hardship exemption and do not have to buy insurance. Or they can get catastrophic coverage and open an HSA.
Click to expand...

They need insurance. They have assets. They are not willing to self-insure. The insurance plan they have chosen "says" it's not eligible for an HSA. I have convinced her to take the deduction anyway and fight it if she's audited. Teump, btw, has indicated he's going to address this HSA conundrum. Good for him. I paid $10,000 a year for my $5000 deductible policy. Am Fam told me I was not eligible for an HSA. **** them. I took the deduction anyway and would have fought it on audit.

As for how long it should take Republicans to present their plan, I suspect they will present it when they make a decision re repealing the ACA. I'm sure they will be as forthcoming with Dems as Dems were forthcoming with them....
 
sangha said:
Why??
Click to expand...

There's a lot of moving parts. The more complicated the GOP makes it, the more of a departure it is from the ACA, the more time it will take. Then there's the regulation and implementation process.
 
Just rename it Romneycare. problem solved
 
Greenbeard said:
I'm shocked--shocked!--that the party with no replacement plan is going to need several more years to "get its house in order."

GOP may delay Obamacare replacement for years


They're playing with tens of millions of lives with no idea of what comes next. That's incredibly dangerous.
Click to expand...

Tens of millions of lives have already been " played with " thanks to the Democrats and the ACA.

To the point where it cost the Dems the House and the Senate in the following midterms and eventually the presidency.

The GOPs doing you people a solid by repealing this law. Finally the albatross is removed from the neck of the Democrat brand ! Your politicians can stop with the awkward avoidances of the issue, maybe even win a election or two in the future
 
If they wish to repeal it then they need to strike while the iron is hot, because in two years the republicans may not control congress, added to the fact that they have stated it would be dealt with first.
 
Did/does anybody HONESTLY believe ACA would/will just be magically appealed and or replaced? Especially even in the first year of a trump presidency? If so shame on you that's about as unrealistic as it gets. ANy repealing, or scraping of ACA at this point will do much more harm than good.

The only thing left to do is to fix parts of it, improve parts of it, add to it and remove some stuff. Yes I know I make it sound a bunch easier than that actually is but the point is, scrapping it is not the answer especially when left, right and even trump admit that many parts of it are very solid. Removing it just hurts the people that are covered now. The most important thing to do is to figure out how to keep the insurance companies from simply putting us in thie predicament over and over again. We regulate them and they just eventually figure out ways around the regulation or make new ways to increase premiums and drive up costs. Like banking, healthcare is alawys going to be a problem with the main goal is profit.
 
Fenton said:
Tens of millions of lives have already been " played with " thanks to the Democrats and the ACA.

To the point where it cost the Dems the House and the Senate in the following midterms and eventually the presidency.

The GOPs doing you people a solid by repealing this law. Finally the albatross is removed from the neck of the Democrat brand ! Your politicians can stop with the awkward avoidances of the issue, maybe even win a election or two in the future
Click to expand...

the day a man can't go bankrupt due to medical bills is the day he becomes a slave.

derp.
 
LaylaWindu said:
Did/does anybody HONESTLY believe ACA would/will just be magically appealed and or replaced? Especially even in the first year of a trump presidency? If so shame on you that's about as unrealistic as it gets. ANy repealing, or scraping of ACA at this point will do much more harm than good.

The only thing left to do is to fix parts of it, improve parts of it, add to it and remove some stuff. Yes I know I make it sound a bunch easier than that actually is but the point is, scrapping it is not the answer especially when left, right and even trump admit that many parts of it are very solid. Removing it just hurts the people that are covered now. The most important thing to do is to figure out how to keep the insurance companies from simply putting us in thie predicament over and over again. We regulate them and they just eventually figure out ways around the regulation or make new ways to increase premiums and drive up costs. Like banking, healthcare is alawys going to be a problem with the main goal is profit.
Click to expand...
If you have a plan that directs people that they must have health insurance as the ACA does, then the plan hinges on force, which is what many people dont like, if that key element is removed, which it needs to be, the plan collapses
 
Absentglare said:
That's just an embarrassingly wrong assessment.
Click to expand...

Survey SAYS:

FOR COMPARISON
CNN/OPINION RESEARCH CORPORATION AND CNN/TIME TRENDS
Better off Worse off About the same No opinion
CNN/ORC
2009 Sept. 11-13 21% 35% 43% 1%
2009 Aug. 28-31 21% 28% 40% *
2009 June 26-28 20% 35% 44% 1%
CNN/TIME
1994 Aug 17-18 20% 31% 45% 4%
1994 July 15% 31% 50% 4%
1994 Jan 18% 29% 50% 3%
1993 Oct 20% 29% 48% 3%
1993 Sept 20% 21% 57% 2%
QUESTION WORDING: From what you know of those health care reforms, do you think you and your family would, in general, be better
off, worse off or about the same?
Click to expand...

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2014/images/07/22/rel7c.pdf

Page 19 is even more revealing. Don't buy the narrative, listen to the people. They will tell you, if you will just listen.
 
Militant_Vegan_ said:
the day a man can't go bankrupt due to medical bills is the day he becomes a slave.

derp.
Click to expand...

Lol ! Now, a man has to go without Healthcare and pay a fine at the end of the year because ObamaCare drove up out of pocket expenses and premiums exponentially
 
MaggieD said:
Why do you assume you know me? If you did, you would know that I completely supported Obamacare and, in fact, debunked death panel claims and many if the other nonsense claims made by the right. I completely disagreed with the Dems' heavy-handedness. Thought that was small-minded. But they wanted all of the credit. So now? They must accept all of the blame.

I have no narrative. And to discredit subjective ridiculous. The left's insistence to ignore subjective is part of the reason they lost the presidency and continue to lose seats in congress. You don't LISTEN.

You think you need to remind me the poorest get subsidies. Such a foolish assumption. All subsidies stop at combined income of $65,000. How many people do you know who can afford the $2200 my cousin pays on $65,000 a year? Their premium is not somehow higher. It's based on age. They make more than $65,000 so there is no subsidy available to them. People cannot afford it! What is so difficult to understand about that?

Do you pay for your own health insurance? I seriously doubt it. What's your premium? What's your deductible? What are your co-pays? What is your age? Will you answer me? Do you even know? Or does your employer subsidize it so that you don't even know the answers?

I venture that it's YOU who has the narrative...whatever that even means.
Click to expand...

First off thanks for the resume but I brought up the vile and disgusting “death panel” lie to compare to your “outrage” about “Nancy thinks I’m stupid” narrative. You didn’t really address my point that the non-stop lies from the right means they think you’re stupid. Where’s your outrage?

Anyhoo Maggie, do yourself a favor. Put you’re your complaint about Obamacare into words (not just some rambling diatribe about your cousin or Nancy being snooty) and then compare it to the previous system and the still non-existent plan from republicans ( in spite of having 6 years to come up with one) . So far all we’ve gotten from you is “nancy was snooty” and “my cousin’s cost are high”.
And Maggie, you ignoring my point about your hypocrisy concerning costs and flailing whether I buy my own healthcare doesn’t make your “my cousin’s costs are high” narrative more believable. It has the opposite effect.
 
Vern said:
First off thanks for the resume but I brought up the vile and disgusting “death panel” lie to compare to your “outrage” about “Nancy thinks I’m stupid” narrative. You didn’t really address my point that the non-stop lies from the right means they think you’re stupid. Where’s your outrage?

Anyhoo Maggie, do yourself a favor. Put you’re your complaint about Obamacare into words (not just some rambling diatribe about your cousin or Nancy being snooty) and then compare it to the previous system and the still non-existent plan from republicans ( in spite of having 6 years to come up with one) . So far all we’ve gotten from you is “nancy was snooty” and “my cousin’s cost are high”.
And Maggie, you ignoring my point about your hypocrisy concerning costs and flailing whether I buy my own healthcare doesn’t make your “my cousin’s costs are high” narrative more believable. It has the opposite effect.
Click to expand...

Get back to me when you answer MY questions...how much do you pay for your insurance? How old are you? What is your deductible? What are your copays? Do you even know this information or does your insurance come from your employer? IN WHICH CASE, you have no IDEA what it costs.

Again, Your insistence that subjective information doesn't matter is one reason HC lost the election. it does matter. It matters a great deal.

And again. I supported Obamacare and effectively countered the right's lies at every opportunity.

This will be my last post to you unless you answer my questions. I doubt you know the answers since you've probably worked for a W2 your whole life.
 
This appears to be the first direct confirmation from leadership that Obamacare isn't going anywhere for a long time.

The next Congress will begin work immediately next year toward repealing President Barack Obama's health care law but delay the changes as Republicans try to come up with an alternative, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Saturday.

The Kentucky Republican insisted that some 20 million Americans who have health care through the six-year-old law will not lose coverage, though the likely upheaval in the insurance industry suggests many could.
Click to expand...
Republicans have been unable to agree on an alternative since the law's enactment in 2010, but now must produce a replacement if they scrap the law. President-elect Donald Trump says he would like to keep major elements of the law — allowing children to remain on their parents' plans until age 26 and ensuring companies don't deny coverage for pre-existing conditions. But it's unclear how a new version of the law could force insurance companies to provide the latter coverage.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom