• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Two Republican Senators propose giving States the option to keep the A.C.A.

Cassandra said:



..Why aren't MORE repubs willing to leave it to the state's discretion how to manage the insurance market? Susan Collins undoubtedly remembers just how bad the insurance market was in Maine before the A.C.A.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/23/...are-act-bill-cassidy-susan-collins-trump.html
Click to expand...

It's okay to run various experiments. So, if a State wants a diffeeent system to organise financing health care that seems fine.

That's much better than putting all the eggs in one basket like aca did.
 
I agree. Just not sure of the funding mechanism. If CA (for example) chooses to keep ACA, the feds shouldn't be paying for their decision. Let the states come up with the money themselves.
 
buck said:
I agree. Just not sure of the funding mechanism. If CA (for example) chooses to keep ACA, the feds shouldn't be paying for their decision. Let the states come up with the money themselves.
Click to expand...

Well, that is not what S.Collins is promoting. The block granting of A.C.A. would leave the money intact but allow more state flexibility. You know, Red states are really the ones who need the funds and have the worst health profiles. Perhaps, the need of their citizens would overcome their ideological disdain for Fed gov't if there was more state control.
If funding is your only concern, are you also anguished about the fact that Red states receive so much more in Fed revenue than they fork over to the Feds compared w Blue states?
 
Cassandra said:
Well, that is not what S.Collins is promoting.
Click to expand...

Then I predict it will go nowhere.

You know, Red states are really the ones who need the funds and have the worst health profiles. Perhaps, the need of their citizens would overcome their ideological disdain for Fed gov't if there was more state control.
If funding is your only concern, are you also anguished about the fact that Red states receive so much more in Fed revenue than they fork over to the Feds compared w Blue states?
Click to expand...

Sure. I would certainly be in favor of less federal funding of entitlement programs, etc... which should be a state issue.
 
Cassandra said:



..Why aren't MORE repubs willing to leave it to the state's discretion how to manage the insurance market? Susan Collins undoubtedly remembers just how bad the insurance market was in Maine before the A.C.A.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/23/...are-act-bill-cassidy-susan-collins-trump.html
Click to expand...

I doubt if insurance companies are interested in running the ACA on a state by state basis. Insurance is a numbers game. I doubt these politicians know what they're talking about. I don't disagree if it's possible though.
 
Cassandra said:
Well, that is not what S.Collins is promoting. The block granting of A.C.A. would leave the money intact but allow more state flexibility. You know, Red states are really the ones who need the funds and have the worst health profiles. Perhaps, the need of their citizens would overcome their ideological disdain for Fed gov't if there was more state control.
If funding is your only concern, are you also anguished about the fact that Red states receive so much more in Fed revenue than they fork over to the Feds compared w Blue states?
Click to expand...

Lol...

Califonia has the highest unfunded pension liabilities in the nation..
O.C. Watchdog: Unfunded pension debt approaching $1 trillion?- OC Watchdog Blog: Orange County Register

And the highest poverty rate when cost of living is taken into consideration
Forbes Welcome

And the Nations highest child poverty rate ..
California Has Highest Child Poverty Rate In Nation | KPBS

California clearly needs the money, and Illinois too.

Illinois' unfunded pension liabilities reach $130 billion: study | Reuters
 
I find fascinating the notion that autoenrollment into an insurance plan you didn't choose to buy (on the admittedly evidence-based assumption that you're too lazy or it's too much of a hassle for you to unenroll) is less offensive than a tax penalty in April for choosing to stay uninsured.

If it's more effective, great! I'm just interested in the argument, which many on the right including Paul Ryan seem to buy, that it's philosophically superior to just actively stick you into a plan you didn't ask for. Rather than withhold some of your tax refund later if you don't go out and choose a plan on your own.
 
Greenbeard said:
I find fascinating the notion that autoenrollment into an insurance plan you didn't choose to buy (on the admittedly evidence-based assumption that you're too lazy or it's too much of a hassle for you to unenroll) is less offensive than a tax penalty in April for choosing to stay uninsured.

If it's more effective, great! I'm just interested in the argument, which many on the right including Paul Ryan seem to buy, that it's philosophically superior to just actively stick you into a plan you didn't ask for. Rather than withhold some of your tax refund later if you don't go out and choose a plan on your own.
Click to expand...

As i suspected, republicans are positioning more and more into the idea that the biggest difference between Obamacare and Trumpcare will be the name.

Something tells me this will be sufficient to satisfy their ****ing constituents, though.
 
Absentglare said:
As i suspected, republicans are positioning more and more into the idea that the biggest difference between Obamacare and Trumpcare will be the name.

Something tells me this will be sufficient to satisfy their ****ing constituents, though.
Click to expand...

Guess so. The ACA had an auto-enrollment requirement for large employers. And that was repealed by the GOP--one of their big successes!

What they actually believe or want or would support I have no idea. But I'm not alone--they don't know either.
 
buck said:
I agree. Just not sure of the funding mechanism. If CA (for example) chooses to keep ACA, the feds shouldn't be paying for their decision. Let the states come up with the money themselves.
Click to expand...

I agree. If a given state is insanely stupid enough to enact a system similar to the ACA, let that state find it's own financing and then face the wrath of their voters.
 
ObamacareFail said:
I agree. If a given state is insanely stupid enough to enact a system similar to the ACA, let that state find it's own financing and then face the wrath of their voters.
Click to expand...

I pity the governor that goes that route. He might end up running for president on the GOP ticket!

romney_laugh_lg.jpg
 
Absentglare said:
This just in: two republican seats opened up in congress.
Click to expand...

Are you kidding? Susan Collins is untouchable in Maine due to her perceived "moderation". Thank God some states still value moderation. Maine's second district- the segment that leans Repub- are comprised of a large number of self-employed, aging farmers, fishermen, and loggers. I can tell you that the funds collected from those church bean suppers designed to raise money for the sick uninsured, don't go far.

She probably knows her plan won't fly with her radical repub. bretheren but she is making the attempt at moderation.
 
Fenton said:
Lol...

Califonia has the highest unfunded pension liabilities in the nation..
O.C. Watchdog: Unfunded pension debt approaching $1 trillion?- OC Watchdog Blog: Orange County Register

And the highest poverty rate when cost of living is taken into consideration
Forbes Welcome

And the Nations highest child poverty rate ..
California Has Highest Child Poverty Rate In Nation | KPBS

California clearly needs the money, and Illinois too.
Click to expand...
I am sure that is true. The point is that California pays more in Fed taxes that it gets back.

This is From Atlantic Magazine, May 2014

"The Wallet Hub analysts essentially asked how much each state receives back as a return on its federal income-tax investment. They compared the 50 states and the District of Columbia on three metrics: 1) federal spending per capita compared with every dollar paid in federal income taxes; 2) the percentage of a state’s annual revenue that comes from federal funding; and 3) the number of federal employees per capita. The third measure received only half the weight of each of the others in the calculation.

What the resulting map shows is that the most “dependent states,” as measured by the composite score, are Mississippi and New Mexico, each of which gets back about $3 in federal spending for every dollar they send to the federal treasury in taxes. Alabama and Louisiana are close behind.

If you look only at the first measure—how much the federal government spends per person in each state compared with the amount its citizens pay in federal income taxes—other states stand out, particularly South Carolina: The Palmetto State receives $7.87 back from Washington for every $1 its citizens pay in federal tax. This bar chart, made from Wallet Hub's data, reveals the sharp discrepancies among states on that measure."
 
Cassandra said:
Are you kidding? Susan Collins is untouchable in Maine due to her perceived "moderation". Thank God some states still value moderation. Maine's second district- the segment that leans Repub- are comprised of a large number of self-employed, aging farmers, fishermen, and loggers. I can tell you that the funds collected from those church bean suppers designed to raise money for the sick uninsured, don't go far.

She probably knows her plan won't fly with her radical repub. bretheren but she is making the attempt at moderation.
Click to expand...

Yes, i was joking. Sorry, if i was better at jokes that might have been obvious :).
 
Cassandra said:
I am sure that is true. The point is that California pays more in Fed taxes that it gets back.

This is From Atlantic Magazine, May 2014

"The Wallet Hub analysts essentially asked how much each state receives back as a return on its federal income-tax investment. They compared the 50 states and the District of Columbia on three metrics: 1) federal spending per capita compared with every dollar paid in federal income taxes; 2) the percentage of a state’s annual revenue that comes from federal funding; and 3) the number of federal employees per capita. The third measure received only half the weight of each of the others in the calculation.

What the resulting map shows is that the most “dependent states,” as measured by the composite score, are Mississippi and New Mexico, each of which gets back about $3 in federal spending for every dollar they send to the federal treasury in taxes. Alabama and Louisiana are close behind.

If you look only at the first measure—how much the federal government spends per person in each state compared with the amount its citizens pay in federal income taxes—other states stand out, particularly South Carolina: The Palmetto State receives $7.87 back from Washington for every $1 its citizens pay in federal tax. This bar chart, made from Wallet Hub's data, reveals the sharp discrepancies among states on that measure."
Click to expand...

Paying more in Federal taxes ( a stale Left wing false narrative ) doesn't negate the massive debt these Democrat controlled States have racked up.
There's no denying California and Illinois public pension funds are unsustainable, have been for some time, that these States for all intensive purposes are bankrupt

If you want to continue pushing this stale predictible partisan narrative then Ill just list the Democrat controlled Cities that have bankrupted themselves into insolvency.....its a long list

Hell, one of those Cities ( Dallas ) is in the State I live in and love.
 
Fenton said:
Paying more in Federal taxes ( a stale Left wing false narrative ) doesn't negate the massive debt these Democrat controlled States have racked up.
There's no denying California and Illinois public pension funds are unsustainable, have been for some time, that these States for all intensive purposes are bankrupt

If you want to continue pushing this stale predictible partisan narrative then Ill just list the Democrat controlled Cities that have bankrupted themselves into insolvency.....its a long list

Hell, one of those Cities ( Dallas ) is in the State I live in and love.
Click to expand...


Well, the problem with your argument is that that the states w pension problems are fairly evenly distributed between party control. That said, recessions and demographic changes exasperate the problem. States with growing populations are going to have an easier time coping w the problem. You will get no argument from me about the short sighted, overly generous choices that pols made regarding pensions. My adopted state is wrestling with this problem as well. At least Oregon is a becoming among the most "moved to" states, unlike Maine, my former home state.

Getting back to the O.P. why should pro state right Repubs object to the states experimenting with ways to provide health care to their citizens? Clearly, none of the states have the financial resources to do this w/o significant assistance from the federal government. I don't see red states rejecting federal assistance for a variety of state needs.
 
Cassandra said:
Getting back to the O.P. why should pro state right Repubs object to the states experimenting with ways to provide health care to their citizens? Clearly, none of the states have the financial resources to do this w/o significant assistance from the federal government. I don't see red states rejecting federal assistance for a variety of state needs.
Click to expand...

To hear democrats argue it, it's a positive to the bottom line. So, if CA (as example) enacts the program themselves, it will more than pay for it's self shortly. Or, just let them raise the taxes on their own residents, rather than the rest of the country.
 
buck said:
To hear democrats argue it, it's a positive to the bottom line. So, if CA (as example) enacts the program themselves, it will more than pay for it's self shortly. Or, just let them raise the taxes on their own residents, rather than the rest of the country.
Click to expand...

Well, a state with an economy the size of California could probably manage its own health care -especially if allowed to keep more of the tax revenue it is now sending to Washington to be distributed elsewhere. Now, if California could additionally negotiate separately for much better terms on bulk drug prices and create a "public option", then yes, it could be a positive for the bottom line. It would certainly be an interesting experiment.

Practically speaking, size matters. It is not possible for small states to do any such thing. Maine is the best example I am familiar with. Insurers don't really want to operate in a state with an aging, overweight population. Attempts to stop them from cherry picking just drove them out of the state.
 
Greenbeard said:
I pity the governor that goes that route. He might end up running for president on the GOP ticket!

romney_laugh_lg.jpg
Click to expand...

You did happen to notice that the RINO you are referring to lost the election, didn't you?
 
Cassandra said:
Well, a state with an economy the size of California could probably manage its own health care
Click to expand...

Then we have no issues. Let them do it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom