JD Rucker:
Graham-Cassidy is Obamacarelite. Period. It fails to address the two biggest issues with Obamacare… which happen to be the two biggest issues raised by conservative Republicans over the past seven years. First, it does NOT remove the federal government’s hands from a healthcare industry in which it does not belong. Second, it does NOT take steps to reducing premiums or health care costs for average American households.
On the first issue, some would point to the block grants, state waivers, and the removal of individual and employer mandates as examples of how this is a step towards removing the federal government from healthcare. I’ll address each of these individually, but let’s look at the obvious problem with that argument. This bill isn’t designed to be a “step.” This is it. This is what the GOP wants the healthcare system to look like indefinitely. If you have a knife in your back, pulling it out a little bit doesn’t mean you no longer have a knife in your back.
Let’s look at the three major components:
- Block Grants: Paul Ryan and Lindsey Graham are screaming, “yay federalism!” Here’s the problem. Block grants coming from the federal government instead of going towards Medicaid expansion doesn’t change a thing. It’s still the federal government taking our money and giving it to insurance companies. Adding the states as a middle man does nothing to change that fact. It gives the states more control on how the money is distributed, but it doesn’t reduce the distribution by a penny. On paper, they’ll come up with math that shows cost reductions for DC. Long-term, it will actually increase the expenditures as grants are reconciled from projections to reality.
- State Waivers: This is a misdirection. It won’t be used in a significant way by any states. Why? The block grants. It would be political suicide for any state legislature to say they’re going to accept less money from DC so they can put everything on the backs of the citizens in their state. Some states will waive some portions, but again, it will not be significant. This is just a magic flag conservatives can wave around to justify voting for the bill.
- Removing Mandates: Good. No problem with this. In fact, I love it. Outside of defunding Planned Parenthood, this is my favorite part of the bill.
As for the second issue – not reducing premiums – this will actually accelerate the rising costs of healthcare, premiums, and deductibles. In other words, when Republicans vowed to reduce your costs of healthcare, they weren’t serious… at least not if they pass this bill. There are many things they could do to reduce costs if they would simply repeal Obamacare and start taking free-market steps. Open up interstate competition. Incentivize HSAs. Encourage innovation and competition in the healthcare industry in general. They have the power and the mandate to make healthcare more affordable for average American households and they simply refuse to do it.
The most common argument you’ll hear is that it’s not perfect but it’s better than Obamacare. I’m okay with better as long as it’s TRULY better, but since this doesn’t address the two biggest flaws of Obamacare, it’s only incrementally better. Pouring sugar on a rotten piece of peach cobbler might make it easier to eat, but you’re still eating rotten food nonetheless. It will still make you sick. The Republicans have control of the House, Senate, and White House. They have absolutely, positively zero excuses for not putting forth a bill that actually addresses the fundamental flaws of Obamacare.
Backlash throws last-ditch Obamacare repeal effort into doubt
And someone is surprised by this?
Maybe they would have better luck if they first bothered to come up with a convincing replacement.
I don’t support this.
These Rinos are as tone deaf as the Democrats, the voters that put them in office want repeal. No O lite, freedom of choice. Work on the things making Insurance expensive, the fools.
https://www.conservativereview.com/articles/3-red-flag-provisions-in-the-graham-cassidy-health-care-bill
Senator Chuck Grassley, regarding the Graham-Cassidy bill, which he intends to vote in favor of:
Any questions?
@Greg: You seem to take some satisfaction that the conservatives won’t get what they really want but will get some form of Obozo lite. Which you equate with being almost as bad as Obozocare. You do realize that shooting for the worst possible alternative (equiv to Obozocare) is not a real plus for the libs or conservatives.
Graham-Cassidy is most likely sunk.
McCain says he will vote no on GOP health-care bill, dealing major blow to repeal effort
Given Senator McCain’s health situation, it isn’t likely that political ambitions or personal ulterior motives entered into his decision. He’s saying what he really thinks, and intends to vote accordingly. Graham-Cassidy is a seriously flawed legislative effort.
Like Other ACA Repeal Bills, Cassidy-Graham Plan Would Add Millions to Uninsured, Destabilize Individual Market
@Greg:
Obozocare was seriously flawed when it was passed and a lot of effort has gone into it by the dumbocraps to make it a lot worse. Anything proposed, except single payer, by defintion, can’t be worse than Obozocare. When you are in the bottom of the well, the only possible direction is ‘up’. Take what we can get now, then make it better. (sound like the dumbocraps?)
Cassidy on new health-care plan: ‘It’s not for Susan, it’s for the Mainers’ (That is to say, We can buy the conscientious hold-outs off. *sniff* It’s for the kids.)
@Greg: I agree it is a bad bill another one size fits none non-solution. As far as millions losing health care, they already have as it became too expensive with no competition.
I hope you have not forgotten all the back room deals to get the original bill passed.
The government has collected 3 billion in 2016 from poor and middle class people that cant afford insurance.