So it sounds like ryan may be open to removing the non continuous penalty which basically means getting rid of any mandate or attempt to keep young healthy people in the poor and preventing people from just not getting insurance until they actually need it. That folks is how you get a death spiral rapidly.
He may as well take it out, since every analysis says it will be completely innefective and just makes the bill more unpopular on the right (since, despite its utter weakness, it creates a perception of forced membership)
Still, if he takes it out, even middle aged and older people who aren't sick RIGHT NOW should drop health insurance other than maybe something which covers them for spending beyond 10k for a catastophic ER admit. With no forcing at all, and assured coverage if you get sick then there's no need for any healthy person to ever have coverage.
Then he can drop the 26 year old part too, since no 26 year old would ever want medical insurance unless they were already sick, and if they were they would have a right to enter the system for the nominal rate anyway.
Its a disaster for everyone!
Eh. Folks on employer plans with set enrollment periods won't be doing that sort of thing which I think is still most of the insured. Also after a certain point where you're routinely taking a couple medications and have multiple doc visits a year group insurance is still likely to be an alright choice.
The individual health insurance market is gonna become a giant dumpster fire immediately though.
I guess enrollment periods create a pseudo penalty even if there is no explicit penalty, which will discourage middle aged people from going without coverage if they are not in very good health.
So it sounds like ryan may be open to removing the non continuous penalty which basically means getting rid of any mandate or attempt to keep young healthy people in the poor and preventing people from just not getting insurance until they actually need it. That folks is how you get a death spiral rapidly.
He may as well take it out, since every analysis says it will be completely innefective and just makes the bill more unpopular on the right (since, despite its utter weakness, it creates a perception of forced membership)
Still, if he takes it out, even middle aged and older people who aren't sick RIGHT NOW should drop health insurance other than maybe something which covers them for spending beyond 10k for a catastophic ER admit. With no forcing at all, and assured coverage if you get sick then there's no need for any healthy person to ever have coverage.
Then he can drop the 26 year old part too, since no 26 year old would ever want medical insurance unless they were already sick, and if they were they would have a right to enter the system for the nominal rate anyway.
Its a disaster for everyone!
I am almost entirely certain that you can only sign up during open enrollment windows even on the exchange unless you have a "life event" like getting married or fired or giving birth.
Waiting until you're sick and then buying insurance is not a thing you are allowed to do, penalty or otherwise.
The first part is certainly correct. I'm not sure about the latter.
You are correct, I forgot about enrollment periods. However, most people who get very sick would get fired, which would then be a qualifying life event and allow them to enroll in a program. And, if you are willing to bet on surviving say half a year on a bare bones program, with no penalties you could absolutely upgrade to superior coverage in the open enrollment.
edit - Even with the strictest interpretation of open enrollment though, if you wait till you get sick, and then wait X months (where X is how many months till the next open enrollment) then you can absolutely wait till you get sick to buy health insurance.
Yea, it definitely seems like the thing to do is to sign up for the cheapest plan possible, just in case you get into a car accident one day and rack up $250k of bills, and if you ever find out you have something long-term like cancer or diabetes or something, then buy real insurance during the next enrollment window.
Yea, it definitely seems like the thing to do is to sign up for the cheapest plan possible, just in case you get into a car accident one day and rack up $250k of bills, and if you ever find out you have something long-term like cancer or diabetes or something, then buy real insurance during the next enrollment window.
Which will be another reason healthcare companies will be skeptical of the new plan. Noone will want to offer both quality plans, and bare bones plans, because the lack of penalties will drive people from your quality plan to your bare bones plan. So, people with quality plans will want there to be only quality plans. However, since your bare bones plan is easy to offer (just cover catastrophic costs, no need for lots of billing support etc) its a low barrier to entry.
So either you end up in a situation in a local market where there are no CHEAP plans (because their existence would ruin the enrollment of the expensive ones) or a local market where there are no quality plans (because no quality plan wants to enter a market where there are cheap plans)
It effectively means there is another incentive for insurance companies to limit choice.
"That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
0
Options
TL DRNot at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered Userregular
So it sounds like ryan may be open to removing the non continuous penalty which basically means getting rid of any mandate or attempt to keep young healthy people in the poor and preventing people from just not getting insurance until they actually need it. That folks is how you get a death spiral rapidly.
He may as well take it out, since every analysis says it will be completely innefective and just makes the bill more unpopular on the right (since, despite its utter weakness, it creates a perception of forced membership)
Still, if he takes it out, even middle aged and older people who aren't sick RIGHT NOW should drop health insurance other than maybe something which covers them for spending beyond 10k for a catastophic ER admit. With no forcing at all, and assured coverage if you get sick then there's no need for any healthy person to ever have coverage.
Then he can drop the 26 year old part too, since no 26 year old would ever want medical insurance unless they were already sick, and if they were they would have a right to enter the system for the nominal rate anyway.
Its a disaster for everyone!
I am almost entirwly certain that you can only sign up during open enrollment windows even on the exchange unless you have a "life event" like getting married or fired or giving birth.
Waiting until you're sick and then buying insurance is not a thing you are allowed to do, penalty or otherwise.
A marriage license is cheap, at least.
+4
Options
ShivahnUnaware of her barrel shifter privilegeWestern coastal temptressRegistered User, Moderatormod
So I guess the thing I don't understand is why the Whitehouse is supporting this bill. We know they obviously don't have their own plan. However, based on the new "leaked" audio of Ryan criticising Trump and their refusal to allow it to be called Trumpcare, you'd think they just be happy to let it fail and expedite the fall of Paul Ryan, whom Trump hates.
It would make sense from a 4D chess perspective if only they hadn't supported the bill.
I'm probably giving them too much credit aren't I?
They are "supporting" it because it makes it look like they are doing something, which is a massive part of their image.
Trump promised "immediate" repeal and replace, like by the end of January at one point.
No one knew how difficult health care could be.
Y'know, aside from people who's job it is to actually know that sort of stuff.
I played D&D with a healthcare-industry-adjacent lawyer the other day
So I guess the thing I don't understand is why the Whitehouse is supporting this bill. We know they obviously don't have their own plan. However, based on the new "leaked" audio of Ryan criticising Trump and their refusal to allow it to be called Trumpcare, you'd think they just be happy to let it fail and expedite the fall of Paul Ryan, whom Trump hates.
It would make sense from a 4D chess perspective if only they hadn't supported the bill.
I'm probably giving them too much credit aren't I?
They are "supporting" it because it makes it look like they are doing something, which is a massive part of their image.
Trump promised "immediate" repeal and replace, like by the end of January at one point.
No one knew how difficult health care could be.
Y'know, aside from people who's job it is to actually know that sort of stuff.
I played D&D with a healthcare-industry-adjacent lawyer the other day
He had things to say about that tweet
I worked at the third largest BCBS carrier in the country for two years in customer service. Orientation was 12 weeks long. There were 11 tests, and if you got less than a 90 on two of them you were let go. After that you were put "in the lab" which is 3+ months of call monitoring. If you "failed" 15% or more of your calls (wrong information, not properly verifying identity etc) you were let go.
I'm not going to get into productivity standards, but the people on the phone at this company basically had to go to school to learn about healthcare and ACA was juuuust starting its rollout.
Is there a word for where the spin on a false statement is to say the false statement meant a different provably false statement?
Is that supposed to be "Everyone who wants to have healthcare AND HAS the financial ability to get it"?
-edit-
Or "Everyone who wants to have healthcare SHOULD HAVE the financial ability to get it"
Almost certainly the former. It's a way out of supporting a plan that will almost certainly lead to fewer people having insurance than under the ACA. It rolls back into Ryan's statement earlier about 'well not having money for healthcare is a choice, so people losing their insurance is actually FREEDOM'
We will legally require doctors to accept US Currency as a form of payment for any services rendered. Universal access!
Yea, it definitely seems like the thing to do is to sign up for the cheapest plan possible, just in case you get into a car accident one day and rack up $250k of bills, and if you ever find out you have something long-term like cancer or diabetes or something, then buy real insurance during the next enrollment window.
this part, at least, is exactly the way things are now.
Yea, it definitely seems like the thing to do is to sign up for the cheapest plan possible, just in case you get into a car accident one day and rack up $250k of bills, and if you ever find out you have something long-term like cancer or diabetes or something, then buy real insurance during the next enrollment window.
That's basically what I do now. We have all HDHPs and there's a $0 tier. Ironically the spread in the three tiers once the deductible is met is only $600 between each.
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said Tuesday that if Democrats don't like a House bill to repeal and replace ObamaCare, they should offer their own legislation.
"if you don't like this proposal, then what's your suggestion? What's your suggestion?" he asked during a weekly Senate GOP leadership news conference.
"I'm sensing that they're just sitting back on their hands and taking great glee, great joy, out of seeing this market place of their creation melting down and people being left high and dry," he added.
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said Tuesday that if Democrats don't like a House bill to repeal and replace ObamaCare, they should offer their own legislation.
"if you don't like this proposal, then what's your suggestion? What's your suggestion?" he asked during a weekly Senate GOP leadership news conference.
"I'm sensing that they're just sitting back on their hands and taking great glee, great joy, out of seeing this market place of their creation melting down and people being left high and dry," he added.
...they are so bad at this.
I am like, 95% certain Bernie has already done this.
*checking*
At the very least, it's still there from the primaries.
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said Tuesday that if Democrats don't like a House bill to repeal and replace ObamaCare, they should offer their own legislation.
"if you don't like this proposal, then what's your suggestion? What's your suggestion?" he asked during a weekly Senate GOP leadership news conference.
"I'm sensing that they're just sitting back on their hands and taking great glee, great joy, out of seeing this market place of their creation melting down and people being left high and dry," he added.
...they are so bad at this.
I am like, 95% certain Bernie has already done this.
*checking*
At the very least, it's still there from the primaries.
Alternate proposal: Make the medicaid expansion mandatory somehow and otherwise undo all the stupid crap the GOP did to hurt the ACA...which is still running better than their plan could.
Paul Ryan has conceded that the bill needs changed to pass the House. Though whether that means making it worse to satisfy the Freedom Caucus (and further jeopardizing it in the Senate), I don't know. There's really no way he can go without pissing off somebody. Making the bill more moderate than it already is would then beg the question of why you're doing a replacement bill at all instead of just fixing the ACA.
0
Options
zepherinRussian warship, go fuck yourselfRegistered Userregular
Paul Ryan has conceded that the bill needs changed to pass the House. Though whether that means making it worse to satisfy the Freedom Caucus (and further jeopardizing it in the Senate), I don't know. There's really no way he can go without pissing off somebody. Making the bill more moderate than it already is would then beg the question of why you're doing a replacement bill at all instead of just fixing the ACA.
I mean we could just offer Medicare to everyone, let people with means pay full freight, allow the employers to offer subsidized company insurance...seams like an easy fix. It'll never happen, but it would be pretty sweet if it did.
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said Tuesday that if Democrats don't like a House bill to repeal and replace ObamaCare, they should offer their own legislation.
"if you don't like this proposal, then what's your suggestion? What's your suggestion?" he asked during a weekly Senate GOP leadership news conference.
"I'm sensing that they're just sitting back on their hands and taking great glee, great joy, out of seeing this market place of their creation melting down and people being left high and dry," he added.
...they are so bad at this.
I am like, 95% certain Bernie has already done this.
*checking*
At the very least, it's still there from the primaries.
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said Tuesday that if Democrats don't like a House bill to repeal and replace ObamaCare, they should offer their own legislation.
"if you don't like this proposal, then what's your suggestion? What's your suggestion?" he asked during a weekly Senate GOP leadership news conference.
"I'm sensing that they're just sitting back on their hands and taking great glee, great joy, out of seeing this market place of their creation melting down and people being left high and dry," he added.
Paul Ryan has conceded that the bill needs changed to pass the House. Though whether that means making it worse to satisfy the Freedom Caucus (and further jeopardizing it in the Senate), I don't know. There's really no way he can go without pissing off somebody. Making the bill more moderate than it already is would then beg the question of why you're doing a replacement bill at all instead of just fixing the ACA.
Because that's what they promised.
And because at the end of the day, all Paul Ryan actually wants to do is lower taxes on the rich and gut government benefits. And Reconciliation means he has to do both at the same time because it needs to be budget neutral over 10 years.
I gotta say I've never seen such a craven attack on social services. Do these guys not realize that this is how you literally get guillotines and mobs in the street? We may have moved beyond that era, but the sentiment is the same: People will get violent over this stuff, and that's not good. This is a frightening amount of ignorance.
Edit: I seem to remember a Denzel Washington movie some ages ago where he holes up in a hospital and takes some hostages to get his son health care. Desperate people take desperate measures.
I gotta say I've never seen such a craven attack on social services. Do these guys not realize that this is how you literally get guillotines and mobs in the street? We may have moved beyond that era, but the sentiment is the same: People will get violent over this stuff, and that's not good. This is a frightening amount of ignorance.
Edit: I seem to remember a Denzel Washington movie some ages ago where he holes up in a hospital and takes some hostages to get his son health care. Desperate people take desperate measures.
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said Tuesday that if Democrats don't like a House bill to repeal and replace ObamaCare, they should offer their own legislation.
"if you don't like this proposal, then what's your suggestion? What's your suggestion?" he asked during a weekly Senate GOP leadership news conference.
"I'm sensing that they're just sitting back on their hands and taking great glee, great joy, out of seeing this market place of their creation melting down and people being left high and dry," he added.
...they are so bad at this.
Oh Cornyn, you gigantic asshat.
They have done that. They tried to do that. Y'all shot them down.
This is your own damn making. Yeah, democrats are gonna get some fucking joy out of making you eat the shit sandwich you've run on for 6 years now.
I gotta say I've never seen such a craven attack on social services. Do these guys not realize that this is how you literally get guillotines and mobs in the street? We may have moved beyond that era, but the sentiment is the same: People will get violent over this stuff, and that's not good. This is a frightening amount of ignorance.
Edit: I seem to remember a Denzel Washington movie some ages ago where he holes up in a hospital and takes some hostages to get his son health care. Desperate people take desperate measures.
It was John Q. Much like Breaking Bad, an 'only in America' type of medical story!
I gotta say I've never seen such a craven attack on social services. Do these guys not realize that this is how you literally get guillotines and mobs in the street? We may have moved beyond that era, but the sentiment is the same: People will get violent over this stuff, and that's not good. This is a frightening amount of ignorance.
Edit: I seem to remember a Denzel Washington movie some ages ago where he holes up in a hospital and takes some hostages to get his son health care. Desperate people take desperate measures.
The violent and heavily-armed segment of the US population is the one that voted these people into power and have been screaming for this kind of healthcare repeal. They are also the segment most easily targeted and manipulated by Briebart/FOX brainwashing into believing that a 100-fold increase in their premiums and massive cuts in their services is an improvement.
If they ever reach the desperate-measures stage, they will turn their desperation against the scapegoat minority the GOP/Briebart will point them at, not against the leaders they have been brainwashed into supporting blindly and especially not against the decisions they themselves have made.
I gotta say I've never seen such a craven attack on social services. Do these guys not realize that this is how you literally get guillotines and mobs in the street? We may have moved beyond that era, but the sentiment is the same: People will get violent over this stuff, and that's not good. This is a frightening amount of ignorance.
Edit: I seem to remember a Denzel Washington movie some ages ago where he holes up in a hospital and takes some hostages to get his son health care. Desperate people take desperate measures.
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said Tuesday that if Democrats don't like a House bill to repeal and replace ObamaCare, they should offer their own legislation.
"if you don't like this proposal, then what's your suggestion? What's your suggestion?" he asked during a weekly Senate GOP leadership news conference.
"I'm sensing that they're just sitting back on their hands and taking great glee, great joy, out of seeing this market place of their creation melting down and people being left high and dry," he added.
...they are so bad at this.
Oh Cornyn, you gigantic asshat.
They have done that. They tried to do that. Y'all shot them down.
This is your own damn making. Yeah, democrats are gonna get some fucking joy out of making you eat the shit sandwich you've run on for 6 years now.
Though, we'd better have the 'fix the parts of Obamacare you broke for no reason bill" on the table tomorrow
1) all states compelled to take Medicaid expansion
2) no way to lose a dollar of coverage assistance by earning a dollar. Each dollar earned by an individual or family must return a post taxation benefit to them after their decline in subsidy assistance
3) restoration of risk corridors.
4) in any market where there is only one insurance provider, 'purchasing' access to Medicaid is an option for everyone. In addition, big incentives for a second provider to enter the market and compete.
5) Sexual health services in all plans
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said Tuesday that if Democrats don't like a House bill to repeal and replace ObamaCare, they should offer their own legislation.
"if you don't like this proposal, then what's your suggestion? What's your suggestion?" he asked during a weekly Senate GOP leadership news conference.
"I'm sensing that they're just sitting back on their hands and taking great glee, great joy, out of seeing this market place of their creation melting down and people being left high and dry," he added.
...they are so bad at this.
While I really wasn't a fan of Charlie Rangel for a few reasons, I'd have loved for him to have gone and slapped HR 3590 down in front of Cornyn and said "There's our pick for legislation".
Just a quick check, so there may be some omissions (redistricting made it complicated), but the following Congresspeople were cosponsors of HR 3590, asterisked ones original cosponsors, that are still serving in the House today.
John Larson (CT1)*, Joe Courtney (CT2), John Lewis (GA5)*, Luis Gutierrez (IL4), Danny Davis (IL7)*, John Yarmuth (KY3)*, Neal Richard (MA1, MA2 at the time)*, Jim McGovern (MA3, MA2 att), Sander Levin (MI12, MI9att)*, Dina Titus (NV1, NV3att), Bill Pascrell (NJ9, NJ8att)*, Joseph Crowley (NY14, NY7att)*, Brian Higgins (NY26, NY27att)*, Walter Jones (NC3)*, Earl Blumenauer (OR3)*, Al Green (TX9), Ron Kind (WI3)*
Any or all of them should just take HR3590 and the law it became, and put it in front of Cornyn.
Seriously, "We don't like the law you put in place, even though it's based upon a conservative policy and implementation, so we're tearing it down, now you need to come up with a replacement!" is one of the most stupid things I've heard come out of Congress. And that's a pretty high bar to clear, with such luminaries as Steve King and Louie Gohmert currently serving.
0
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
As soon as the Democrats loudly say "here's our solution," the politics get much easier for the GOP, who can say "hey at least the AHCA is better than that garbo Dem bill." This is some delicate judo here and just because your opponent says "Oh yeah? Gimme your best punch, right here," doesn't mean you should listen and start boxing instead. Because if they're asking for it it's because they know how to handle it.
I gotta say I've never seen such a craven attack on social services. Do these guys not realize that this is how you literally get guillotines and mobs in the street? We may have moved beyond that era, but the sentiment is the same: People will get violent over this stuff, and that's not good. This is a frightening amount of ignorance.
Edit: I seem to remember a Denzel Washington movie some ages ago where he holes up in a hospital and takes some hostages to get his son health care. Desperate people take desperate measures.
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said Tuesday that if Democrats don't like a House bill to repeal and replace ObamaCare, they should offer their own legislation.
"if you don't like this proposal, then what's your suggestion? What's your suggestion?" he asked during a weekly Senate GOP leadership news conference.
"I'm sensing that they're just sitting back on their hands and taking great glee, great joy, out of seeing this market place of their creation melting down and people being left high and dry," he added.
...they are so bad at this.
Oh Cornyn, you gigantic asshat.
They have done that. They tried to do that. Y'all shot them down.
This is your own damn making. Yeah, democrats are gonna get some fucking joy out of making you eat the shit sandwich you've run on for 6 years now.
Though, we'd better have the 'fix the parts of Obamacare you broke for no reason bill" on the table tomorrow
1) all states compelled to take Medicaid expansion
2) no way to lose a dollar of coverage assistance by earning a dollar. Each dollar earned by an individual or family must return a post taxation benefit to them after their decline in subsidy assistance
3) restoration of risk corridors.
4) in any market where there is only one insurance provider, 'purchasing' access to Medicaid is an option for everyone. In addition, big incentives for a second provider to enter the market and compete.
5) Sexual health services in all plans
Number one is unconstitutional, and number two makes no sense.
I gotta say I've never seen such a craven attack on social services. Do these guys not realize that this is how you literally get guillotines and mobs in the street? We may have moved beyond that era, but the sentiment is the same: People will get violent over this stuff, and that's not good. This is a frightening amount of ignorance.
Edit: I seem to remember a Denzel Washington movie some ages ago where he holes up in a hospital and takes some hostages to get his son health care. Desperate people take desperate measures.
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said Tuesday that if Democrats don't like a House bill to repeal and replace ObamaCare, they should offer their own legislation.
"if you don't like this proposal, then what's your suggestion? What's your suggestion?" he asked during a weekly Senate GOP leadership news conference.
"I'm sensing that they're just sitting back on their hands and taking great glee, great joy, out of seeing this market place of their creation melting down and people being left high and dry," he added.
...they are so bad at this.
Oh Cornyn, you gigantic asshat.
They have done that. They tried to do that. Y'all shot them down.
This is your own damn making. Yeah, democrats are gonna get some fucking joy out of making you eat the shit sandwich you've run on for 6 years now.
Though, we'd better have the 'fix the parts of Obamacare you broke for no reason bill" on the table tomorrow
1) all states compelled to take Medicaid expansion
2) no way to lose a dollar of coverage assistance by earning a dollar. Each dollar earned by an individual or family must return a post taxation benefit to them after their decline in subsidy assistance
3) restoration of risk corridors.
4) in any market where there is only one insurance provider, 'purchasing' access to Medicaid is an option for everyone. In addition, big incentives for a second provider to enter the market and compete.
5) Sexual health services in all plans
Number one is unconstitutional, and number two makes no sense.
Number one is possibly fixable constitution-wise but yeah, two should already be covered by phase outs. There might be some jumps in other older assistance programs though.
Five is also likely unconstitutional under the devout corporation doctrine.
The devout corporation bullshit can be overturned by act of Congress though. Just state there's no such thing, since corporations are created by statute anyways.
Actually that may be a state matter though. Get on that Delaware.
So I guess the thing I don't understand is why the Whitehouse is supporting this bill. We know they obviously don't have their own plan. However, based on the new "leaked" audio of Ryan criticising Trump and their refusal to allow it to be called Trumpcare, you'd think they just be happy to let it fail and expedite the fall of Paul Ryan, whom Trump hates.
It would make sense from a 4D chess perspective if only they hadn't supported the bill.
I'm probably giving them too much credit aren't I?
They are "supporting" it because it makes it look like they are doing something, which is a massive part of their image.
Trump promised "immediate" repeal and replace, like by the end of January at one point.
No one knew how difficult health care could be.
Y'know, aside from people who's job it is to actually know that sort of stuff.
I looked at this post and for a moment wondered whether I had quoted myself.
I've seen about two or three other users with Best Boy Revali avatars, yeah. Had those moments as well.
I gotta say I've never seen such a craven attack on social services. Do these guys not realize that this is how you literally get guillotines and mobs in the street? We may have moved beyond that era, but the sentiment is the same: People will get violent over this stuff, and that's not good. This is a frightening amount of ignorance.
Edit: I seem to remember a Denzel Washington movie some ages ago where he holes up in a hospital and takes some hostages to get his son health care. Desperate people take desperate measures.
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said Tuesday that if Democrats don't like a House bill to repeal and replace ObamaCare, they should offer their own legislation.
"if you don't like this proposal, then what's your suggestion? What's your suggestion?" he asked during a weekly Senate GOP leadership news conference.
"I'm sensing that they're just sitting back on their hands and taking great glee, great joy, out of seeing this market place of their creation melting down and people being left high and dry," he added.
...they are so bad at this.
Oh Cornyn, you gigantic asshat.
They have done that. They tried to do that. Y'all shot them down.
This is your own damn making. Yeah, democrats are gonna get some fucking joy out of making you eat the shit sandwich you've run on for 6 years now.
Though, we'd better have the 'fix the parts of Obamacare you broke for no reason bill" on the table tomorrow
1) all states compelled to take Medicaid expansion
2) no way to lose a dollar of coverage assistance by earning a dollar. Each dollar earned by an individual or family must return a post taxation benefit to them after their decline in subsidy assistance
3) restoration of risk corridors.
4) in any market where there is only one insurance provider, 'purchasing' access to Medicaid is an option for everyone. In addition, big incentives for a second provider to enter the market and compete.
5) Sexual health services in all plans
Number one is unconstitutional, and number two makes no sense.
I'm pretty sure states can be compelled to raise the drinking age to 21 expand Medicaid?
I gotta say I've never seen such a craven attack on social services. Do these guys not realize that this is how you literally get guillotines and mobs in the street? We may have moved beyond that era, but the sentiment is the same: People will get violent over this stuff, and that's not good. This is a frightening amount of ignorance.
Edit: I seem to remember a Denzel Washington movie some ages ago where he holes up in a hospital and takes some hostages to get his son health care. Desperate people take desperate measures.
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said Tuesday that if Democrats don't like a House bill to repeal and replace ObamaCare, they should offer their own legislation.
"if you don't like this proposal, then what's your suggestion? What's your suggestion?" he asked during a weekly Senate GOP leadership news conference.
"I'm sensing that they're just sitting back on their hands and taking great glee, great joy, out of seeing this market place of their creation melting down and people being left high and dry," he added.
...they are so bad at this.
Oh Cornyn, you gigantic asshat.
They have done that. They tried to do that. Y'all shot them down.
This is your own damn making. Yeah, democrats are gonna get some fucking joy out of making you eat the shit sandwich you've run on for 6 years now.
Though, we'd better have the 'fix the parts of Obamacare you broke for no reason bill" on the table tomorrow
1) all states compelled to take Medicaid expansion
2) no way to lose a dollar of coverage assistance by earning a dollar. Each dollar earned by an individual or family must return a post taxation benefit to them after their decline in subsidy assistance
3) restoration of risk corridors.
4) in any market where there is only one insurance provider, 'purchasing' access to Medicaid is an option for everyone. In addition, big incentives for a second provider to enter the market and compete.
5) Sexual health services in all plans
Number one is unconstitutional, and number two makes no sense.
I'm pretty sure states can be compelled to raise the drinking age to 21 expand Medicaid?
Sadly, Roberts and four of his coworkers disagreed. At least as it was written. It gets complicated and isn't terribly on topic but basically Fed strings on money have to be "reasonable" to refuse or else it's coercive and unconstitutional.
I gotta say I've never seen such a craven attack on social services. Do these guys not realize that this is how you literally get guillotines and mobs in the street? We may have moved beyond that era, but the sentiment is the same: People will get violent over this stuff, and that's not good. This is a frightening amount of ignorance.
Edit: I seem to remember a Denzel Washington movie some ages ago where he holes up in a hospital and takes some hostages to get his son health care. Desperate people take desperate measures.
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said Tuesday that if Democrats don't like a House bill to repeal and replace ObamaCare, they should offer their own legislation.
"if you don't like this proposal, then what's your suggestion? What's your suggestion?" he asked during a weekly Senate GOP leadership news conference.
"I'm sensing that they're just sitting back on their hands and taking great glee, great joy, out of seeing this market place of their creation melting down and people being left high and dry," he added.
...they are so bad at this.
Oh Cornyn, you gigantic asshat.
They have done that. They tried to do that. Y'all shot them down.
This is your own damn making. Yeah, democrats are gonna get some fucking joy out of making you eat the shit sandwich you've run on for 6 years now.
Though, we'd better have the 'fix the parts of Obamacare you broke for no reason bill" on the table tomorrow
1) all states compelled to take Medicaid expansion
2) no way to lose a dollar of coverage assistance by earning a dollar. Each dollar earned by an individual or family must return a post taxation benefit to them after their decline in subsidy assistance
3) restoration of risk corridors.
4) in any market where there is only one insurance provider, 'purchasing' access to Medicaid is an option for everyone. In addition, big incentives for a second provider to enter the market and compete.
5) Sexual health services in all plans
Number one is unconstitutional, and number two makes no sense.
I'm pretty sure states can be compelled to raise the drinking age to 21 expand Medicaid?
Sadly, Roberts and four of his coworkers disagreed. At least as it was written. It gets complicated and isn't terribly on topic but basically Fed strings on money have to be "reasonable" to refuse or else it's coercive and unconstitutional.
I didn't know that was already ruled on. Looking at it, 2 of 8 thought it was fine, 3 of 8 thought that taking away 100% of the medicaid funds was coercive and unconstitutional, but argued that they can be compelled by funding decisions. So taking away 100% of the medicaid funds in coercive, but taking away 8% of the federal highway funds was not. So what % can they use that might compel states to accept medicaid expansion, without being coercive? How much is a states medicaid fund? Is 8% of that fund enough to compel without being coercive?
Yea, I think Medicaid expansion could be made to be a reasonable incentive. The issue is that the GOP states will make unreasonable decisions for political gain so...
Really the thing that list of fixes was missing was the whole "spouse" thing which is a pretty huge oversight.
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
i mean, in virginia, expanding medicaid will literally save us a billion dollars every year but the argument against it is that it is expensive and so we can't afford to expand
He really might just care about "winning" with no care for the content.
I thought that has been blatantly obvious throughout ALL of his campaign and his presidency so far. He cares about being adored and about being perceived as successful and a winner. Everything else doesn't matter in the slightest.
As soon as the Democrats loudly say "here's our solution," the politics get much easier for the GOP, who can say "hey at least the AHCA is better than that garbo Dem bill." This is some delicate judo here and just because your opponent says "Oh yeah? Gimme your best punch, right here," doesn't mean you should listen and start boxing instead. Because if they're asking for it it's because they know how to handle it.
I seriously wouldn't bet at this point that any Republican has an actual plan or thought beyond the superficial. If they say "Oh yeah, gimme your best punch," it's because they believe that the Dem's best punch will be a limp-wristed slap they can laugh off, not because they had some kind of Dr. Doom plan. Of course, all the people far smarter than them, especially in the media, will speculate that perhaps they did, but the only foresight they've shown thus far is for marginalizing minorities.
I gotta say I've never seen such a craven attack on social services. Do these guys not realize that this is how you literally get guillotines and mobs in the street? We may have moved beyond that era, but the sentiment is the same: People will get violent over this stuff, and that's not good. This is a frightening amount of ignorance.
Edit: I seem to remember a Denzel Washington movie some ages ago where he holes up in a hospital and takes some hostages to get his son health care. Desperate people take desperate measures.
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said Tuesday that if Democrats don't like a House bill to repeal and replace ObamaCare, they should offer their own legislation.
"if you don't like this proposal, then what's your suggestion? What's your suggestion?" he asked during a weekly Senate GOP leadership news conference.
"I'm sensing that they're just sitting back on their hands and taking great glee, great joy, out of seeing this market place of their creation melting down and people being left high and dry," he added.
...they are so bad at this.
Oh Cornyn, you gigantic asshat.
They have done that. They tried to do that. Y'all shot them down.
This is your own damn making. Yeah, democrats are gonna get some fucking joy out of making you eat the shit sandwich you've run on for 6 years now.
Though, we'd better have the 'fix the parts of Obamacare you broke for no reason bill" on the table tomorrow
1) all states compelled to take Medicaid expansion
2) no way to lose a dollar of coverage assistance by earning a dollar. Each dollar earned by an individual or family must return a post taxation benefit to them after their decline in subsidy assistance
3) restoration of risk corridors.
4) in any market where there is only one insurance provider, 'purchasing' access to Medicaid is an option for everyone. In addition, big incentives for a second provider to enter the market and compete.
5) Sexual health services in all plans
Number one is unconstitutional, and number two makes no sense.
Doesnt matter that it's impossible or unconstitutional on the first point. We're not in charge. Practicality of implementing point 1, likely via threatened cuts to other programs, is achieved later.
Point 2 refers to the problem done families have where their joint incomes tick them into a box where they are too rich for medicaid but not yet rich enough to have the subsidues work. It's about removing all the 'my wages went up and now I lost money due to shrinking subsidies' sob stories.
Posts
I guess you could quit your job to get into a special enrollment period
I guess enrollment periods create a pseudo penalty even if there is no explicit penalty, which will discourage middle aged people from going without coverage if they are not in very good health.
You are correct, I forgot about enrollment periods. However, most people who get very sick would get fired, which would then be a qualifying life event and allow them to enroll in a program. And, if you are willing to bet on surviving say half a year on a bare bones program, with no penalties you could absolutely upgrade to superior coverage in the open enrollment.
edit - Even with the strictest interpretation of open enrollment though, if you wait till you get sick, and then wait X months (where X is how many months till the next open enrollment) then you can absolutely wait till you get sick to buy health insurance.
Which will be another reason healthcare companies will be skeptical of the new plan. Noone will want to offer both quality plans, and bare bones plans, because the lack of penalties will drive people from your quality plan to your bare bones plan. So, people with quality plans will want there to be only quality plans. However, since your bare bones plan is easy to offer (just cover catastrophic costs, no need for lots of billing support etc) its a low barrier to entry.
So either you end up in a situation in a local market where there are no CHEAP plans (because their existence would ruin the enrollment of the expensive ones) or a local market where there are no quality plans (because no quality plan wants to enter a market where there are cheap plans)
It effectively means there is another incentive for insurance companies to limit choice.
A marriage license is cheap, at least.
I played D&D with a healthcare-industry-adjacent lawyer the other day
He had things to say about that tweet
I worked at the third largest BCBS carrier in the country for two years in customer service. Orientation was 12 weeks long. There were 11 tests, and if you got less than a 90 on two of them you were let go. After that you were put "in the lab" which is 3+ months of call monitoring. If you "failed" 15% or more of your calls (wrong information, not properly verifying identity etc) you were let go.
I'm not going to get into productivity standards, but the people on the phone at this company basically had to go to school to learn about healthcare and ACA was juuuust starting its rollout.
Tldr fuck that tweet.
We will legally require doctors to accept US Currency as a form of payment for any services rendered. Universal access!
this part, at least, is exactly the way things are now.
That's basically what I do now. We have all HDHPs and there's a $0 tier. Ironically the spread in the three tiers once the deductible is met is only $600 between each.
...they are so bad at this.
I am like, 95% certain Bernie has already done this.
*checking*
At the very least, it's still there from the primaries.
https://berniesanders.com/issues/medicare-for-all/
-edit-
I am already picturing the avalanche of congresspeople presenting their versions of healthcare on the floor, and I'm already laughing.
The harder the rain, honey, the sweeter the sun.
HR 676 It's been introduced every Session since a Dingell has been in Congress.
Paul Ryan has conceded that the bill needs changed to pass the House. Though whether that means making it worse to satisfy the Freedom Caucus (and further jeopardizing it in the Senate), I don't know. There's really no way he can go without pissing off somebody. Making the bill more moderate than it already is would then beg the question of why you're doing a replacement bill at all instead of just fixing the ACA.
I don't even feel like looking for the 2009-2010 mirror version of this news story. It exists - I know it does.
There should be a checklist comparison because the attempt to unwind the ACA is playing out just like the effort to implement.
"Punch me right here."
Because that's what they promised.
And because at the end of the day, all Paul Ryan actually wants to do is lower taxes on the rich and gut government benefits. And Reconciliation means he has to do both at the same time because it needs to be budget neutral over 10 years.
Edit: I seem to remember a Denzel Washington movie some ages ago where he holes up in a hospital and takes some hostages to get his son health care. Desperate people take desperate measures.
Same thing with food and a lot of basic services.
Oh Cornyn, you gigantic asshat.
They have done that. They tried to do that. Y'all shot them down.
This is your own damn making. Yeah, democrats are gonna get some fucking joy out of making you eat the shit sandwich you've run on for 6 years now.
It was John Q. Much like Breaking Bad, an 'only in America' type of medical story!
The violent and heavily-armed segment of the US population is the one that voted these people into power and have been screaming for this kind of healthcare repeal. They are also the segment most easily targeted and manipulated by Briebart/FOX brainwashing into believing that a 100-fold increase in their premiums and massive cuts in their services is an improvement.
If they ever reach the desperate-measures stage, they will turn their desperation against the scapegoat minority the GOP/Briebart will point them at, not against the leaders they have been brainwashed into supporting blindly and especially not against the decisions they themselves have made.
Though, we'd better have the 'fix the parts of Obamacare you broke for no reason bill" on the table tomorrow
1) all states compelled to take Medicaid expansion
2) no way to lose a dollar of coverage assistance by earning a dollar. Each dollar earned by an individual or family must return a post taxation benefit to them after their decline in subsidy assistance
3) restoration of risk corridors.
4) in any market where there is only one insurance provider, 'purchasing' access to Medicaid is an option for everyone. In addition, big incentives for a second provider to enter the market and compete.
5) Sexual health services in all plans
Just a quick check, so there may be some omissions (redistricting made it complicated), but the following Congresspeople were cosponsors of HR 3590, asterisked ones original cosponsors, that are still serving in the House today.
John Larson (CT1)*, Joe Courtney (CT2), John Lewis (GA5)*, Luis Gutierrez (IL4), Danny Davis (IL7)*, John Yarmuth (KY3)*, Neal Richard (MA1, MA2 at the time)*, Jim McGovern (MA3, MA2 att), Sander Levin (MI12, MI9att)*, Dina Titus (NV1, NV3att), Bill Pascrell (NJ9, NJ8att)*, Joseph Crowley (NY14, NY7att)*, Brian Higgins (NY26, NY27att)*, Walter Jones (NC3)*, Earl Blumenauer (OR3)*, Al Green (TX9), Ron Kind (WI3)*
Any or all of them should just take HR3590 and the law it became, and put it in front of Cornyn.
Seriously, "We don't like the law you put in place, even though it's based upon a conservative policy and implementation, so we're tearing it down, now you need to come up with a replacement!" is one of the most stupid things I've heard come out of Congress. And that's a pretty high bar to clear, with such luminaries as Steve King and Louie Gohmert currently serving.
Number one is unconstitutional, and number two makes no sense.
Number one is possibly fixable constitution-wise but yeah, two should already be covered by phase outs. There might be some jumps in other older assistance programs though.
Five is also likely unconstitutional under the devout corporation doctrine.
Actually that may be a state matter though. Get on that Delaware.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
I've seen about two or three other users with Best Boy Revali avatars, yeah. Had those moments as well.
He really might just care about "winning" with no care for the content.
I'm pretty sure states can be compelled to raise the drinking age to 21 expand Medicaid?
Sadly, Roberts and four of his coworkers disagreed. At least as it was written. It gets complicated and isn't terribly on topic but basically Fed strings on money have to be "reasonable" to refuse or else it's coercive and unconstitutional.
I didn't know that was already ruled on. Looking at it, 2 of 8 thought it was fine, 3 of 8 thought that taking away 100% of the medicaid funds was coercive and unconstitutional, but argued that they can be compelled by funding decisions. So taking away 100% of the medicaid funds in coercive, but taking away 8% of the federal highway funds was not. So what % can they use that might compel states to accept medicaid expansion, without being coercive? How much is a states medicaid fund? Is 8% of that fund enough to compel without being coercive?
Really the thing that list of fixes was missing was the whole "spouse" thing which is a pretty huge oversight.
I thought that has been blatantly obvious throughout ALL of his campaign and his presidency so far. He cares about being adored and about being perceived as successful and a winner. Everything else doesn't matter in the slightest.
I seriously wouldn't bet at this point that any Republican has an actual plan or thought beyond the superficial. If they say "Oh yeah, gimme your best punch," it's because they believe that the Dem's best punch will be a limp-wristed slap they can laugh off, not because they had some kind of Dr. Doom plan. Of course, all the people far smarter than them, especially in the media, will speculate that perhaps they did, but the only foresight they've shown thus far is for marginalizing minorities.
Doesnt matter that it's impossible or unconstitutional on the first point. We're not in charge. Practicality of implementing point 1, likely via threatened cuts to other programs, is achieved later.
Point 2 refers to the problem done families have where their joint incomes tick them into a box where they are too rich for medicaid but not yet rich enough to have the subsidues work. It's about removing all the 'my wages went up and now I lost money due to shrinking subsidies' sob stories.