Veteran Advisor
Posts: 1,687
Registered: ‎06-30-2010

Re: healthcare it and weep

[ Edited ]

3-4-5 years ago, I 100% agreed with just killing ACA.  Problem now is that 50%+ of the population would scream loudly, the votes likely aren't any more there to just kill it than the votes were there over the past several years, the insurance companies likely wouldn't be able to fill in the holes right away, etc.  Would be difficult to just pick up where we left off 5-6-7 years ago.  Plus, what about the people who lost their previous coverages due to ACA, what about the companies that quit selling health insurance, and what about the remaining problem of pre-existing conditions?  And, health insurance, along with healthcare costs, were spiraling upward before ACA also.


Repealing only -- leaves a lot of questions, and some big potential gaps for those with individual coverage and/or pre-existing conditions.


Repeal and replace -- depends on the replacement.


Until a workable and acceptable replacement is formulated, it makes sense to me to "fix" what appears broken or unworkable in the current system.  If the "free preventive care" requirements are causing the problem, then make them subject to the deductible; if the "subsidies" are too large, reduce them; etc.  And, while we're at it, let's make sure we provide for open competition among the insurance companies, across state lines, and include state/federal employees and retirees, especially our senators and representatives, as subject to all the same health insurance rules in the marketplace as the rest of us.  I don't understand the benefit to having kids on parent policies until they're 26, but I don't have any kids, and I've had my own health insurance (thru employers or individually purchased) since I was 18, except for part of 2016 (between when my policy got cancelled and when I signed up thru the marketplace for 2017).  Even wa-a-ay back when I was in college, we could buy student health coverage for something like $50 per semester -- that was quite a bargain.


When we say there are many people who "don't qualify" for insurance, I do understand that, yet those people were still getting health care, at least when absolutely needed -- thru paying their own money, and/or thru Medicaid &/or unpaid (paid indirectly by the rest of us anyway).  That was likely a lot of the theory in requiring everyone to have coverage, and to help offset some of the cost.


On welfare spending in general -- that's been a problem for most of us conservative-minded folks, and even part of the fairly liberal-minded.  Welfare has evolved from basic temporary essentials, to a way of life for far too many folks, at least far too many that seem to make it their permanent lifestyle, and want "raises and more benefits" every year.  Makes me think of a landlord's daughter -- single, never married, low 20's, maybe 25, has 4-year college degree, works at a daycare making minimum wage, lives with her folks, has an infant son (actually a planned pregnancy), planning on a 2nd child (guess just hasn't picked the father yet), and who knows what all forms of assistance she's receiving, but I know she has researched it and receives it, except for maybe the psychiatric help.  I'm not at all judging her, but geez, I think her Republican parents are starting to have some health problems.