The Republican Party’s Awful Healthcare Plan

The Tuesday night address of President Donald Trump to Congress in a joint session did not help as no new details were outlined on how to move with the repeal.

Under the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s latest draft, states that chose to expand their Medicaid population could continue to do so with federal funding until January 1, 2020, according to House GOP lawmakers and aides.

And there’s no way any individual could ever afford to pay for that level of healthcare out of pocket without health insurance. Trump left the decision on the Congress but is unlikely to get support from Democrat leaders at the moment. It’s redefining health care reimbursement, according to Chris Queram, president and CEO of the Madison-based Wisconsin Collaboration for Healthcare Quality: “Value is a megatrend and firmly entrenched regardless of what happens with Obamacare”.

There are two interconnected reasons that President Trump and congressional Republicans have not and will not offer a viable ACA replacement plan.

The issue was front and center as constituents at recent fiery town hall meetings voiced concerns to their lawmakers about how millions of Americans could lose their coverage. We have the industrialized world’s worst-performing health care system. Because women’s health care has come so far; it can’t go back.

Ryan argues that this change will enable health insurance firms to lower premiums for everyone else, since they will not be saddled with caring for those with pre-existing conditions. For example, the ACA says plans must fully pay for certain types of preventive care that not all states required previously.

When that bill passed through Congress a year ago, it was widely acknowledged by GOP leadership and rank-and-file members that it was a dry run for how Republicans would repeal the bill in 2017.

If you think that a 60-year-old will be able to get health insurance for $333.33 a month once insurance companies are allowed to charge older people dramatically more (another change to current regulations Republicans want to make), you’re living on another planet.

Funding care for the sickest separately in high-risk pools would remove the largest costs from the individual insurance market, lower premiums considerably and save the market from collapse. That bill lifted the ACA’s penalties for not having insurance as well as several of the health law’s taxes and fees.

Funding under the law is key for NY, since the state participated in the expansion of Medicaid.

Economist Joe Antos of the business-oriented American Enterprise Institute, said the idea of cross-state health insurance has an instinctive appeal because Americans have seen competition drive down costs in other areas, from credit cards to air travel.

That would be an even bigger catastrophe, and would take us in the opposite direction from which we need to go. A 2106 analysis by the Commonwealth Fund of health care costs in eight advanced nations showed that the USA continued to spend far more than any other nation on health care, with generally poorer health care results.

As Republicans continue to debate the best path forward for replacing the Affordable Care Act, either in full or part, they should keep in mind one of medicine’s longstanding principles: Don’t just treat the symptoms, treat the disease. Given all the available evidence about the failings of America’s health care system, we can’t understand why emulating systems of nations that have performed so much better hasn’t gained traction. That’s because most people in the state obtain their coverage through their employer (61%), or through government-run programs like Medicare and Medicaid (27%). Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said there’s a “strong consensus” for cross-state sales.

No one was allowed to have a copy, a Republican lawmaker said.

The state budget is expected to pass March 31.

The translation: 60 votes would be needed in the Senate.