Pelosi Slams GOP ‘Cowardice’ on Obamacare Repeal With No Replacement - Polidicks

[quote]WASHINGTON ― Republicans are dead set on acting swiftly to dismantle the Affordable Care Act without having a new health care reform platform in place because they know their party doesn’t have a way forward, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Monday. The congressional GOP leadership’s preferred strategy on Obamacare ― dubbed repeal-and-delay ― is to begin moving filibuster-proof legislation through Congress as soon as lawmakers return this week, with an eye toward presenting it to President-elect Donald Trump to sign right after he’s inaugurated this month.[/quote] [url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/nancy-pelosi-gop-obamacare_us_586aa013e4b0d9a5945c228b?jvb657ffwwhtt65hfr[/url]

It would be a mistake for the Democrats not to capitalize on the anger and resentment that millions of Americans who are going to lose their healthcare coverage as a result of this will feel. I hope they have enough sense to realize this, and I hope they also make sure that these people know to place the blame and to direct their hatred entirely towards the Republicans and Trump.

So here's a question: can they actually end coverage for people who have health insurance through an Obamacare-created marketplace? My understanding (IANAL) is that the actual insurance is a contract between two private individuals. The ACA created and regulated the exchanges on which they were sold, and regulated elements of pricing and policy, and mandated individuals have insurance, but can Congress legally void those contracts? All I think they can do is shut down the exchanges and remove the individual mandate - which may allow escape provisions in the insurance agreement to be used, but is that even a standard feature of ACA-market insurance policies?

I believe unless the contract holders (consumer side) void the contract, it has to remain valid. IANAL either though.

[QUOTE=gman003-main;51615969]So here's a question: can they actually end coverage for people who have health insurance through an Obamacare-created marketplace? My understanding (IANAL) is that the actual insurance is a contract between two private individuals. The ACA created and regulated the exchanges on which they were sold, and regulated elements of pricing and policy, and mandated individuals have insurance, but can Congress legally void those contracts? All I think they can do is shut down the exchanges and remove the individual mandate - which may allow escape provisions in the insurance agreement to be used, but is that even a standard feature of ACA-market insurance policies?[/QUOTE] basically they will collapse the marketplaces so no insurance company would ever in their right mind offer coverage on them because the republicans will withdraw all of the funding that keeps them from having to take a loss on people with preexisting conditions, large healthcare costs, or other sort of high risk category. Think back to 3 months ago, insurance companies were debating whether to go into the marketplaces, with many places being down to 1 insurer. When the republicans repeal obamacare funding through budgetary reconciliation, they're all just going to stop participating in exchanges. so there's not going to be any insurance plans available in the 2017 marketplaces at all. people on insurance now will probably be fine, unless they actually withhold funding for their plans entirely which might void the contracts, but nobody else will be able to sign up for insurance going forward since the exchanges will have fully collapsed

I don't get the whole preexisting conditions being covered thing. It makes no economic sense.

[QUOTE=Pantz Master;51616262]I don't get the whole preexisting conditions being covered thing. It makes no economic sense.[/QUOTE] no it doesn't, which is why we forced people to have insurance to broaden the pool, and subsidized people with preexisting conditions so that insurance companies wouldn't be totally fucked by the requirement to take them. before hand, if you had any preexisting condition, even if it were misdiagnosed, you'd be shit out of luck getting insurance, meaning you'd die a slow painful death in financial ruin.

[QUOTE=gman003-main;51615969]So here's a question: can they actually end coverage for people who have health insurance through an Obamacare-created marketplace? My understanding (IANAL) is that the actual insurance is a contract between two private individuals. The ACA created and regulated the exchanges on which they were sold, and regulated elements of pricing and policy, and mandated individuals have insurance, but can Congress legally void those contracts? All I think they can do is shut down the exchanges and remove the individual mandate - which may allow escape provisions in the insurance agreement to be used, but is that even a standard feature of ACA-market insurance policies?[/QUOTE] You should check out an Urban Institute study on this topic. It answers a lot of these questions. Long story short, a partial repeal is estimated to cause the number of uninsured to rise to 29.8 million people in 2019, many millions of which would be children 18 and younger. [quote]Congress is currently considering partial repeal of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) through the budget reconciliation process without a replacement. If partial repeal is modeled on the reconciliation bill vetoed in January 2016, only some ACA provisions would be struck down, including the Medicaid expansion, the premium tax credits and cost-sharing assistance provided through the Marketplaces, and the individual mandate. Other provisions, such as the insurance market reforms, would remain (Blumberg, Buettgens, and Holahan 2016). A recent Urban Institute analysis found that partial repeal of the ACA through budget reconciliation would cause the number of uninsured to rise by 29.8 million in 2019; nearly 4 million of the newly uninsured would be children ages 17 and younger (Blumberg, Buettgens, and Holahan 2016). This brief builds on that analysis by providing more detailed information about the effects on coverage for children and parents. A large body of research has shown that uninsurance leads to reduced use of health care, lower financial well-being, and increased stress for families (Howell and Kenney 2012; McMorrow et al. 2016) and that coverage expansions targeting the prenatal period and childhood have lasting effects on educational outcomes, earnings, and health in adulthood (Brown, Kowalski, and Lurie 2015; Goodman-Bacon 2016; Lipton et al. 2016; Miller and Wherry 2016). Therefore, it is important to consider the particular nature and magnitude of the coverage impacts of potential policy changes for children and parents. Numerous studies have found that parents’ access to health insurance affects not only their coverage and care, but also their children’s coverage and well-being (Aizer and Grogger 2003; Davidoff et al. 2003; Dubay and Kenney 2003; Gifford, Weech-Maldonado, and Short 2005; Guendelman and Pearl 2004; Ku and Broaddus 2000).[/quote] [url]http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/86706/coverage_implications_for_parents_and_children_1.pdf#page=1&zoom=auto,-265,547[/url] There's also issues with insurers possibly trying to "flee" before any sort of new plan is even put into place. [url]http://money.cnn.com/2016/12/06/news/economy/obamacare-insurers/index.html[/url] Basically, it's a fucking stupid idea to attempt to repeal it. Like I tried explaining before, it was passed into law almost 7 years ago. All of the critical portions have already been implemented. It's too late to repeal it without making a huge mess out of things, which is exactly what's going to happen if the Republicans and Trump attempt to do so. If/when that happens, we need to make sure that the anger and hatred and blame that will result (and it [i]will[/i]; you can't do this to people and have everything be just fine) are squared entirely on them for all the problems that will ensue as a consequence. We need to start preparing for this outcome now, so when it does happen we know how to effectively propagandize it and use it against them.

[QUOTE=Pantz Master;51616262]I don't get the whole preexisting conditions being covered thing. It makes no economic sense.[/QUOTE] I'm going to explain this once, and brook no argument, because this is the most simple thing. At least if I'm reading this right as some mildly passive rejection of the forced coverage of pre-existing conditions. Many people, just like you, say [B]how is it fair to force the company to take a guaranteed loss? Isn't insurance like gambling? Isn't it unfair to force the Casino to lose?[/B] In an ideal world? Yes. In the classic American society? Yes. We no longer live in the classic American society, and we do not live in the ideal world. Healthcare prices, at every level, are keyed to the cost of insurance. Let me repeat that. [B]Healthcare costs aim to match the payouts of insurance companies.[/B] They [I]do not[/I] aim to match the purchasing power of "the market," or "the common man," because the common man is actually, typically, grossly over-insured. This leads to one very simple, very easily understood issue. Runaway price inflation, without any monetary inflation to suit it, and no one's the wiser. Overinsured (or even regularly-insured) citizens go to the doctor. The doctor bills them, they hit their co-pay, and the insurance company picks up the rest. This means the doctor can go wild. Fourty dollar cotton balls, hundred dollar stethoscope observations, six hundred dollar ass-revealing paper gowns, the list goes on. "Well why doesn't the free market sort it out? Why doesn't a cheap doctor just open up?" Because doctoring isn't a cheap business. Country doctors with their black leather bags and pince-nezes, doing house calls down the road [I]don't exist[/I] anymore. Medical school is more expensive than it ever has been, and the over-injection of capital in to the Healthcare industry by insurance has driven the cost of basic supplies to match. Sure, small-practice doctors exist, but you know what they do when you need [I]or maybe need[/I] something they don't have in house? They refer you to big practices, and you're right back in the big-money-insurance-motivated-price-bracket. Oh, and those small practice doctors? They're not dumb. Medicine is a [B]business.[/B] They don't leave money on the table. So they charge the same, forty dollar cotton balls, etc. etc. "Okay. Well what if I just go it without insurance, and hope I don't get sick?" Okay. Enjoy your fantasy land. All it takes is one 'catastrophic incident.' Which themselves are by definition entirely unavoidable and unpredictable. Heart attack, car crash, falling tree, electrocution. Quickly you'll rack up tens of thousands of dollars in bills. For the cost of one uninsured catastrophic incident, you could've gone to a reasonably nice college for four years. You'll be in medical debt that, with insurance, could've only been a few hundred, maybe a few thousand dollars on-treatment, plus a small rate hike. "Okay okay," I hear you saying. "What's this got to do with the pre-existing conditions?" Well, Mister Strawman, imagine that because you say, have cancer. Let's even say it's [I]really early[/I] cancer. Let's say it's somewhere really easy to get rid of, even. Completely treatable. Untreated, it'll rack your body and crush your soul, but it's treatable. Easiest cancer in the world. Well congrats, no one will insure you now, because you already have cancer. Won't even let you in the door. If you're really unlucky, your insurance company that you already had will determine it was a pre-existing condition, from before you signed on to the plan, and refuse to cover any services for treatment. That's right. If you allow pre-existing condition denial, the insurance companies will screw you as hard as they can whenever they have a whiff of something they can dismiss as pre-existing. They will retroactively deny you coverage, they will, through means and ways magical and fantastical, determine you were already at-risk, at-fault and outta-luck. So now you get to buy treatment for your life [I]ending,[/I] not just threatening, condition on the insurance-priced market. Enjoy your regular one-hundred and fifty thousand dollar bills for routine checkups at specialist oncologists who have their prices pegged to the industry standard. To the [B]insured[/B] standard. It's not even as catastrophic as cancer. It can be chronic life-long conditions that are entirely manageable, but fatal without treatment. Like congenital diabetes, or early-onset arthritis. Hope you enjoy choosing between buying your medicine and your dinner every week for the rest of your life, because you got yourself some pretty big pre-existing conditions right there with pretty steep price-tags to boot, buck-o. The fact of the matter is, the near-ponzi scheme-money-laundering of our medical industry has created a buy-in-never-out system. You can't operate as an economic actor in the healthcare market [I]without[/I] insurance, unless you're extremely well off, in which case you just buy [I]really good insurance[/I] and you end up spending less overall than someone with really bad insurance. The healthcare industry in America has to be regulated, for the same reason that monopolies have to be regulated. Failing to do so creates a destructive cycle of commerce that enriches the top players, serves the unwitting middle grade, and so horribly abuses the lowest level that it violates American standards and ideals to their core. Anything else, any insistence that this is somehow a matter for the free market to handle, is bourgeois patter, the sort that says, "so long as I'm fine, I'm not concerned." It smacks of lacking empathy for your fellow human beings, your fellow countrymen, and even the man you might have been there but for the grace of God and good breeding.

[QUOTE=Govna;51616389]You should check out an Urban Institute study on this topic. It answers a lot of these questions. Long story short, a partial repeal is estimated to cause the number of uninsured to rise to 29.8 million people in 2019, many millions of which would be children 18 and younger. [url]http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/86706/coverage_implications_for_parents_and_children_1.pdf#page=1&zoom=auto,-265,547[/url] There's also issues with insurers possibly trying to "flee" before any sort of new plan is even put into place. [url]http://money.cnn.com/2016/12/06/news/economy/obamacare-insurers/index.html[/url] Basically, it's a fucking stupid idea to attempt to repeal it. Like I tried explaining before, it was passed into law almost 7 years ago. All of the critical portions have already been implemented. It's too late to repeal it without making a huge mess out of things, which is exactly what's going to happen if the Republicans and Trump attempt to do so. If/when that happens, we need to make sure that the anger and hatred and blame that will result (and it [i]will[/i]; you can't do this to people and have everything be just fine) are squared entirely on them for all the problems that will ensue as a consequence. We need to start preparing for this outcome now, so when it does happen we know how to effectively propagandize it and use it against them.[/QUOTE] The only people with anger and hatred will be the people who don't vote for the GOP anyways, and the ones that DO vote for the GOP will be glad when their monthly premiums aren't over $700 a month when they are perfectly healthy. This is ENTIRELY the Democrat's mess. They knew it was fucked, they were warned it wouldn't work, and they still rammed it through without any Republican support. For all of the good it's produced for the lower classes, it's slammed the middle class two to three times as hard, and let's not forget bleeding insurers dry until they had to pull out of the marketplace. The mess it's created and will continue to create in it's repeal will fall SQUARELY on the shoulders of the Democrats. If you didn't want the mess, you shouldn't have passed it.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;51617076]The only people with anger and hatred will be the people who don't vote for the GOP anyways, and the ones that DO vote for the GOP will be glad when their monthly premiums aren't over $700 a month when they are perfectly healthy. This is ENTIRELY the Democrat's mess. They knew it was fucked, they were warned it wouldn't work, and they still rammed it through without any Republican support. For all of the good it's produced for the lower classes, it's slammed the middle class two to three times as hard, and let's not forget bleeding insurers dry until they had to pull out of the marketplace. The mess it's created and will continue to create in it's repeal will fall SQUARELY on the shoulders of the Democrats. If you didn't want the mess, you shouldn't have passed it.[/QUOTE] Its very easy to blame obamacare for these problems but in the end Obama faced a choice of increasing health care premiums for most people and making people get health insurance or leaving people who weren't rich to die of easily preventable conditions because they were priced out. It was successful in its aim of increasing the rate of insured people. The cost was increased prices. The problem is and always has been this perverse view of healthcare as a privelege and not a right in the US.

[QUOTE=Pantz Master;51616262]I don't get the whole preexisting conditions being covered thing. It makes no economic sense.[/QUOTE] Wellbeing of citizens makes economic sense, the hell are you talking about? Part of the reason it was government subsidized, and part of the reason socialized healthcare works as well as it does. Everyone pays in, and in the end, everyone benefits from a more healthy economy.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;51617076]The only people with anger and hatred will be the people who don't vote for the GOP anyways, and the ones that DO vote for the GOP will be glad when their monthly premiums aren't over $700 a month when they are perfectly healthy. This is ENTIRELY the Democrat's mess. They knew it was fucked, they were warned it wouldn't work, and they still rammed it through without any Republican support. For all of the good it's produced for the lower classes, it's slammed the middle class two to three times as hard, and let's not forget bleeding insurers dry until they had to pull out of the marketplace. The mess it's created and will continue to create in it's repeal will fall SQUARELY on the shoulders of the Democrats. If you didn't want the mess, you shouldn't have passed it.[/QUOTE] It's also saved the live of millions of people that can't afford it. It aint perfect and it needs reform, not to be repealed.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;51617076]The only people with anger and hatred will be the people who don't vote for the GOP anyways, and the ones that DO vote for the GOP will be glad when their monthly premiums aren't over $700 a month when they are perfectly healthy. This is ENTIRELY the Democrat's mess. They knew it was fucked, they were warned it wouldn't work, and they still rammed it through without any Republican support. For all of the good it's produced for the lower classes, it's slammed the middle class two to three times as hard, and let's not forget bleeding insurers dry until they had to pull out of the marketplace. The mess it's created and will continue to create in it's repeal will fall SQUARELY on the shoulders of the Democrats. If you didn't want the mess, you shouldn't have passed it.[/QUOTE] Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the Republicans basically gut the ACA into what it is now because they didn't want it to pass in the first place? They are the ones who wanted to try to force the Democrats into giving up on the act through underhanded tactics that should never be supported. As much as I hate that they approved the Republican modified act the only other option was to show them that they could get away with it. At least by passing it they sent the message that they won't be bullied and still try laying the framework for a hopefully better health care platform.

[QUOTE=Shock_Coil;51617567]Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the Republicans basically gut the ACA into what it is now because they didn't want it to pass in the first place?[/QUOTE] So many people have conveniently forgotten this little tidbit of information.

[QUOTE=Shock_Coil;51617567]Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the Republicans basically gut the ACA into what it is now because they didn't want it to pass in the first place? They are the ones who wanted to try to force the Democrats into giving up on the act through underhanded tactics that should never be supported. As much as I hate that they approved the Republican modified act the only other option was to show them that they could get away with it. At least by passing it they sent the message that they won't be bullied and still try laying the framework for a hopefully better health care platform.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=1/4 Life;51617590]So many people have conveniently forgotten this little tidbit of information.[/QUOTE] People don't forget it, it's a moot point because the democrats had full control, passed it with no republican votes, and therefore could have passed anything they wanted. They CHOSE to pass it how it is in the name of "doing SOMETHING" and now they must accept the responsibility of the bill THEY wrote and THEY passed.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;51617619]People don't forget it, it's a moot point because the democrats had full control, passed it with no republican votes, and therefore could have passed anything they wanted. They CHOSE to pass it how it is in the name of "doing SOMETHING" and now they must accept the responsibility of the bill THEY wrote and THEY passed.[/QUOTE] [quote=History] The bill originated in the Senate, though both the House and Senate were working on versions of a health care bill at the same time. Democrats in the House of Representatives were not happy with the bill, as they had expected some ability to negotiate changes to the bill. Since Republicans in the Senate were threatening to filibuster any bill they did not support, and Democrats no longer had enough seats to override the filibuster, no changes could be made to the bill. Since any changes to the bill by the House would require it to be re-evaluated in the Senate, the original version was passed on condition that it would be amended by a subsequent bill.[/quote]

You're proving my point that they knew it was shit, but passed it anyways. They never had to pass the bill in the first place.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;51617774]You're proving my point that they knew it was shit, but passed it anyways. They never had to pass the bill in the first place.[/QUOTE] "Hey America we're going to deliver the best healthcare bill in the world to you." -4 years, millions in tax dollars, compromise, and a republican minority later- "Hey America, Republicans are big meanie heads so we give up." Yeah, that'd go over real well. May I remind you that Republicans were actually shutting down the government around this time if they didn't get their way?

[QUOTE=Govna;51615940]It would be a mistake for the Democrats not to capitalize on the anger and resentment that millions of Americans who are going to lose their healthcare coverage as a result of this will feel. I hope they have enough sense to realize this, and I hope they also make sure that these people know to place the blame and to direct their hatred entirely towards the Republicans and Trump.[/QUOTE] ACA made healthcare insurance too expensive for me. So for now I've gone without it. I've just had to pay the doctor bills entirely from my pocket. Real coverage there....

[QUOTE=1/4 Life;51617798]"Hey America we're going to deliver the best healthcare bill in the world to you." -4 years, millions in tax dollars, compromise, and a republican minority later- "Hey America, Republicans are big meanie heads so we give up." Yeah, that'd go over real well. May I remind you that Republicans were actually shutting down the government around this time if they didn't get their way?[/QUOTE] Yeah, it would go over well. I would have much more respect for the Democrats if they had passed nothing when they realized they couldn't pass a good bill.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;51617076]The mess it's created and will continue to create in it's repeal will fall SQUARELY on the shoulders of the Democrats. If you didn't want the mess, you shouldn't have passed it.[/QUOTE] What a crock of horseshit. Even if I agreed that the ACA was irredeemable its absolutely on the Republicans to created a replacement. If they actually cared about healthcare and were generally pro-life then now with all 3 branches of government in their hands they can actually prove it.

They couldn't have picked a better spokesperson than Nancy "Pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it" Pelosi? Oh, it's HuffPo. That being said, they seriously need to get their shit together if they plan on repeal.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;51617076]The only people with anger and hatred will be the people who don't vote for the GOP anyways, and the ones that DO vote for the GOP will be glad when their monthly premiums aren't over $700 a month when they are perfectly healthy. This is ENTIRELY the Democrat's mess. They knew it was fucked, they were warned it wouldn't work, and they still rammed it through without any Republican support. For all of the good it's produced for the lower classes, it's slammed the middle class two to three times as hard, and let's not forget bleeding insurers dry until they had to pull out of the marketplace. The mess it's created and will continue to create in it's repeal will fall SQUARELY on the shoulders of the Democrats. If you didn't want the mess, you shouldn't have passed it.[/QUOTE] tldr, premiums will go up when the ACA is repealled, premiums were going up before the ACA was enacted, and premiums have gone up while its been law. the reason premiums go up is because medical costs have gone up and neither republicans or the free market will do shit to fix that, the aca actually helped lower the growth rate but thats glossed over

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;51617076]The only people with anger and hatred will be the people who don't vote for the GOP anyways, and the ones that DO vote for the GOP will be glad when their monthly premiums aren't over $700 a month when they are perfectly healthy. This is ENTIRELY the Democrat's mess. They knew it was fucked, they were warned it wouldn't work, and they still rammed it through without any Republican support. For all of the good it's produced for the lower classes, it's slammed the middle class two to three times as hard, and let's not forget bleeding insurers dry until they had to pull out of the marketplace. The mess it's created and will continue to create in it's repeal will fall SQUARELY on the shoulders of the Democrats. If you didn't want the mess, you shouldn't have passed it.[/QUOTE] That's some interesting logic, to say the least. The ACA is an imperfect solution to a serious problem, no doubt, but it [I]did[/I] achieve its goal of making healthcare more accessible. Despite its many flaws, it expanded insurance coverage to 20 million people. Repealing it, with no alternative plan, literally rips healthcare away from tens of millions of people who otherwise may not be able to afford or qualify for health insurance, which is a much more immediate and alarming problem than inflated insurance prices (which is primarily the fault of the insurance companies themselves still trying to maximize profits, regardless of the externalities). I'm not even telling you that it shouldn't or cannot be repealed, but there [b]must[/B] be a competent alternative solution in place, or we are doing nothing but taking a giant step backwards. You can't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Twenty million people should not lose health coverage because impatient legislators want to put a feather in their cap.