• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Where's Republicans' alternative to Obamacare? It's right here. (1 Viewer)

Neomalthusian

DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2011
Messages
10,821
Reaction score
3,348
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
H.R. 3121 - American Health Care Reform Act of 2013

2_photo.jpg


The prevailing liberal reaction to the plan has been to dismiss it. It isn't a serious alternative to the Affordable Care Act, they say, because it doesn't provide health insurance to as many people or offer the same protections to those with pre-existing conditions. Obamacare supporters expect the law to increase the number of people with insurance by 25 million. The Lewin Group has estimated that a tax deduction would increase that number by only about 9 million.

These criticisms are partly right. The Republicans should replace their tax deduction with a tax credit, which would have a higher value for people with low incomes and thus do more to extend insurance. Increasing the number of people with health insurance may not do much for their health — the evidence that it would is pretty weak — but it will make them more financially secure. That's especially worth doing because federal policy, by tying insurance to employment, has locked a lot of people out of health insurance markets and thus made them less secure.

Republicans should make two other modifications to the plan. People who have access to employer coverage shouldn't be allowed to use the tax deduction or tax credit to purchase health insurance on their own. Eventually we ought to move toward a system that's much less dependent on employers, but we should minimize the disruptiveness of this transition.

And medical malpractice reform, as popular as it is among Republicans, shouldn't be done at the federal level. Medical torts have traditionally been regulated by states, and states have the incentive to set their policies on it the right way because their residents will pay the price if they don't.

Even with these flaws, though, the Republican plan is superior to Obamacare. It's less coercive. It requires fewer taxes. It doesn't have as much potential to reduce full-time employment. And it's more likely to control costs, relying as it does on the power of competition rather than the guidance of Washington-based experts.

LINK
 
Can we please negotiate?
We're sorry we didn't go to conference the last 18 times the Senate asked!
Can'tor we all just get along, little dogie?
 
So... fewer poor people benefit, but rich people get more money out of it. Sounds like the Republicans.
 
LOL Leave it to the GOP for bringing "Too little too late" to new heights.
Where were they during the AHC negotiations? No where, they refused en mass.

Wow nice policy analysis. You sound like you really care about the cost of health care.

So... fewer poor people benefit, but rich people get more money out of it. Sounds like the Republicans.

For one thing, be more specific. For another, the point of reforming health care is to control health care costs, not to just hand out health care to poor people.

So the GOP solution is a tax deduction and a tax credit.

It is more than that.
 
Wow nice policy analysis. You sound like you really care about the cost of health care.



For one thing, be more specific. For another, the point of reforming health care is to control health care costs, not to just hand out health care to poor people.



It is more than that.

Actually the problem we have IS the 25 million who don't have insurance. That drives costs up all by itself because we all pay for them anyway.
 
Actually the problem we have IS the 25 million who don't have insurance. That drives costs up all by itself because we all pay for them anyway.

The problem is that our health care is astronomically expensive, not that people don't have insurance. People who don't have insurance don't have very much money. If they did, most of them would buy insurance. So whether they're publicly covered or subsidized to hook into private insurance does not change anything about the real problem, which is that our health care is astronomically expensive.

I can't believe you people haven't figured this out yet.
 
Actually the problem we have IS the 25 million who don't have insurance. That drives costs up all by itself because we all pay for them anyway.

Obviously this isn't our only problem, but it definitely is one of our problems. When I hear people complain about how we're going to pay a subsidy to people to buy insurance and how that will cost other taxpayers and this is income redistribution I cannot help but think "True, but we're already doing it anyway."
 
Actually the current Affordable Care Act looks remarkably like what Bob Dole and Bush senior hammered out in the early 90s.
Their republicon plan is now law...
Go figure...
 
Actually the current Affordable Care Act looks remarkably like what Bob Dole and Bush senior hammered out in the early 90s.
Their republicon plan is now law...
Go figure...

And sprinkle some Romney and Heritage Foundation on top.;)
 
For one thing, be more specific. For another, the point of reforming health care is to control health care costs, not to just hand out health care to poor people.

It's to make it affordable for everyone. That might just mean that its costs will be progressive, and you personally might not pay less. You can afford it. I can, too. Suck it up and stop whining.
 
It's to make it affordable for everyone. That might just mean that its costs will be progressive, and you personally might not pay less. You can afford it. I can, too. Suck it up and stop whining.
It looks as if prices are rising, rather than falling. And it also looks as if the uninsured numbers aren't going to drop much, either. CBO: Obamacare Will Leave 30 Million Uninsured | CNS News So we will still be paying for the uninsured in the ER anyway.
 
It looks as if prices are rising, rather than falling. And it also looks as if the uninsured numbers aren't going to drop much, either. CBO: Obamacare Will Leave 30 Million Uninsured | CNS News So we will still be paying for the uninsured in the ER anyway.

Obamacare was supposed to cover everyone--at least that is what I thought I heard was the reason for changing our health care system.. At the time I thought I heard this, there were 30 million people who weren't covered by insurance. Now that Obamacare is the law of the land, there are still 30 million who will not be covered. What mischief is that 30 million up to, anyway?

Greetings, humbolt. :2wave:
 
Obamacare was supposed to cover everyone--at least that is what I thought I heard was the reason for changing our health care system.. At the time I thought I heard this, there were 30 million people who weren't covered by insurance. Now that Obamacare is the law of the land, there are still 30 million who will not be covered. What mischief is that 30 million up to, anyway?

No, it wasn't. It hasn't since we gave the Republicans yet another concession and took out the public option. Both your and Humbolt's complaints would be solved if that hadn't happened. Congratulations. You made this bed. Now sleep in it. And maybe find out what you made before you start complaining.
 
No, it wasn't. It hasn't since we gave the Republicans yet another concession and took out the public option. Both your and Humbolt's complaints would be solved if that hadn't happened. Congratulations. You made this bed. Now sleep in it. And maybe find out what you made before you start complaining.

I'm not sure I understand this public option thing. The way I see it, the state and federal exchanges are public options. Are they not?
 
Obamacare was supposed to cover everyone--at least that is what I thought I heard was the reason for changing our health care system.. At the time I thought I heard this, there were 30 million people who weren't covered by insurance. Now that Obamacare is the law of the land, there are still 30 million who will not be covered. What mischief is that 30 million up to, anyway?

Greetings, humbolt. :2wave:
They're still going to the ER for everything, and apparently they'll continue in like numbers in spite of the program heralded to fix that and the rising cost curve.
 
No, it wasn't. It hasn't since we gave the Republicans yet another concession and took out the public option. Both your and Humbolt's complaints would be solved if that hadn't happened. Congratulations. You made this bed. Now sleep in it. And maybe find out what you made before you start complaining.

I'm confused what was the point in giving Republicans concessions when ACA was passed with 0 Republican votes? IOW, what did the concessions gain?
 
I'm not sure I understand this public option thing. The way I see it, the state and federal exchanges are public options. Are they not?

Public option would be like opening up medicare for all. Pay premium (sliding scale?) and you can buy in before you reach retirement age.
 
I'm not sure I understand this public option thing. The way I see it, the state and federal exchanges are public options. Are they not?

I don't think so. The state/fed exchanges are mere marketplaces (gathering points) for folks to shop for coverage from private insurance companies. If anything they are facilitators for the Ins Co's to increase the size of the pie offsetting the effect of their 20% cap on administration/profit.
 
No, it wasn't. It hasn't since we gave the Republicans yet another concession and took out the public option. Both your and Humbolt's complaints would be solved if that hadn't happened. Congratulations. You made this bed. Now sleep in it. And maybe find out what you made before you start complaining.
Concessions? This ACA belongs to the political left. You own it. Nobody on the right voted for it. Everybody on the left did, and it bears the president's signature. It's your baby. If Obama, Reid and Pelosi had wanted the public option, they could've legislated and passed it. They didn't. What we now have is their product. The left is so desperate to distance themselves from this mess they've resorted to calling it Heritagecare, Romneycare, and maybe they'll get around to Gingrichcare when the smelling salts start to kick in.
 
Republicans don't automatically owe the Liberals an alternative for every fruitcake idea the Liberals come up with. Why should Liberals be allowed to control the agenda in this manner?

The ONLY alternative in this case should be NO. Liberals need to get used to hearing that without throwing tantrums.
 
It's to make it affordable for everyone. That might just mean that its costs will be progressive, and you personally might not pay less. You can afford it. I can, too. Suck it up and stop whining.

We can't afford it. We need the federal government to subsidize our purchase. That's not "affordable." That's called propping up unaffordability. It makes more people dependent on the federal government.

A better policy would do more to actually control the astronomical costs, not subsidize them. That's one of the reasons why HR 3121 is a better policy.
 
Last edited:
We can't afford it. We need the federal government to subsidize our purchase. That's not "affordable." That's called propping up unaffordability. It makes more people dependent on the federal government.

A better policy would do more to actually control the astronomical costs, not subsidize them. That one of the reasons why HR 3121 is a better policy.

The problem is that healthcare in this country has been broken for decades.

What legitimate major comprehensive reform attempts have happened by Republicans over the years. I heard about pulling yourself up by your bootstraps and tort reform for decades.

The Reoublicans could have been helped for decades. Pardon the dems if they do not buy any attempts from your side as comprehensive legislation aimed at providing comprehensive healthcare for Americans that cannot afford it.

You all have had years (decades) to come to the table and be taken seriously.
 
They're still going to the ER for everything, and apparently they'll continue in like numbers in spite of the program heralded to fix that and the rising cost curve.

So we're still going to subsidize the ER visits, in addition to probably paying more for our own policies if we don't receive subsidies? Such a deal! :thumbdown: I wonder how the projected shortage of doctors is going to affect ER care? Finally, why are so many big insurers already pulling out of the state exchanges in so many states? That is disturbing!

Greetings, humbolt. :2wave:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom