It comes as no surprise to me that establishment RINOs are reneging on their promise to repeal Obamacare, instead, they are simply proposing to amend it. We should totally nuke the ACA, as we were promised.
The Rs are lying when they say this is the only way they can repeal Obamacare, what they aren’t telling you is that they are not repealing it. The Ds are lying too, when they say everything is hunky-doory. It is not.
RINO: Repeal In Name Only. Here are the first lines of the RINO establishment version of “repeal”. It really only amends.
Budget Reconciliation Legislative Recommendations Relating to Repeal and Replace of the Patient Protection and Afford-able Care Act
TITLE I—ENERGY AND
Subtitle A—Patient Access to
Public Health Programs
SEC. 101. THE PREVENTION AND PUBLIC HEALTH FUND.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (b) of section 4002 of
the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (42
U.S.C. 300u–11), as amended by section 5009 of the 21st
Century Cures Act, is amended—<<
This does not repeal the ACA, folks, it only amends it, and leaves the worst pillars of Obamacare in place. Do we really need another albatross of national health care? It is still completely unconstitutional, and is just as likely, if not more so, to collapse.
The ACA was passed in full using “Reconcilliation”, it can be repealed the exact same way. “Root and branch” is how McConnell put it during the general election, now that they are still in power, the story has changed.
Once the establishment RINOs got behind Trump, I knew we were in trouble. For example, Ryan has stated that this will be a three pronged attack, with the first being the current bill, the second being HHS Secretary Price’s administrative orders, exactly as Sebelious and Burwell did under Obamacare. That should give you a clue, THEY ARE NOT REPEALING OBAMACARE, THEY ARE SIMPLY AMENDING IT.
The Secretary of Health and Human Services was mentioned over 400 times in the PPACA, and supposedly Price wants to change over 1400 orders to date. What do you suppose will happen when we have another Democrat Secretary of HHS?
This is insane. Repeal the damn thing, as we were promised, and then work on tax code and incentives to make health care work for everybody.
Why Pre-Existing Conditions Should Be Left to the Market | Foundation for Economic Education
The race to the bottom.
I want the government out of my Doctor’s office and hospital room. RINO-care (Repeal In Name Only) does none of that, and actually makes the problem even worse.
We should completely repeal the ACA, root and branch. Then change the tax code in ways that makes sense, like roll-over HSAs, insuring across state lines, and repealing the anti-trust exemption under the Commerce Clause for health insurers. Tort reform would need to be done on a state level. There is no enumerated power for the feds to interfere with health insurance at all.
Yes, let’s go back to the bad old days before Obamacare and improve that, letting the open market, the states, the health care providers, and the people to decide what is best.
I have long been an advocate of allowing individuals to deduct the cost of health insurance, just as business has been able to since WWII. Giving individuals a tax credit is something else entirely, credits are a direct subsidy. Think Earned Income Tax Credit, where low wage earners can receive a “refund” for (much) more than was withheld.
Health Savings Accounts should be expanded and reformed where anyone can have access to them, and the use it or lose it each tax year needs to go. This would have several advantages, especially for young workers, who could roll over unused HSA contributions coupled with high deductible catastrophic insurance, which we used to call major medical. The HSA monies could be used for a doctor check up, dental and eye-care, letting any balance roll over. As the youngster ages, the deductible would go up for the catastrophic portion, but hopefully the balance of the HSA would go up right along with it.
Do we really need a mandate that adult children be covered under the parents plan until the age of 26? In a free market, that could certainly be offered, but it should be an option.
As I’ve said over and over, demanding coverage for pre-existing conditions is not insurance at all, it is simply welfare, using the insurance company as the financial distribution arm. Can you buy auto insurance after you totaled it, and then demand that they cover your pre-existing loss? How about buying home-owners insurance when your house is on fire? Of course not.
There are lots of other common-sense solutions I could get into, but the main thing is that we don’t need Washington deciding what our health insurance should look like. I don’t care if it is a Democrat or Republican proposal.
Read the 10th Amendment sometime. It is very clear. Health-care and health insurance is not in the federal jurisdiction, they have no business there.