NR:
House Republicans should vote for the latest version of the health-care bill. We say so even though we have criticized previous versions and the process that led to this one, and even though we still have serious reservations. We say it because the bill has moved in the right direction, and because in our judgment passage through the House now considerably raises the likelihood that we will see improvements in health policy this year.
The bill as it stands would abolish Obamacare’s fines on people without health insurance, reduce taxes and spending, reform Medicaid by moving it closer to federalist principles, and open the door to deregulation in states that choose to pursue it. It would thus move us closer to a system in which people would be able to buy renewable catastrophic coverage, and without subjecting such policies to disadvantages compared with other types of insurance.
Some House Republicans are concerned that the bill might undermine protections for people with pre-existing conditions because, under some circumstances, it would let states allow insurers to consider people’s health status when pricing coverage. But those circumstances should ease their concerns. Insurers could consider health status only in the case of people who have not been continuously insured, and even then could consider health status only for each person for a one-year period, and only in states that offer such people access to high-risk pools. The point of that provision is to give people an incentive to buy coverage when they’re healthy and remain continuously insured without an individual mandate. It is not intended to leave people with pre-existing conditions unprotected, and it takes some care to avoid doing that.
Senators should pursue two complementary objectives in amending the bill if it comes before them:
Passing this would conflict with every single argument (actual legitimate arguments and not the gestapo roundup of grandmas and down syndrome babies or doctors fleeing or long lines at the doctor or the millions of job loss and such) presented by the opposition party. You guys cried “rammed through” yet you now advocate it. You cried fowl about senatorial protocol but now seem to accept it. There was some silly yapping that it was unconstitutional because not a single member of the opposition party voted for it but now that’s out the window. You folks had a field day over passing it to see what’s in it but now cheer an incompetent mad man in the WH who admits he’s clueless of it’s content and a Republican Congress who seem to just want to pass it without knowledge of it simply for spite. You even went on about the lack of R input (which is somewhat akin to killing grandma) yet now have no concern of that fairness.
The shallowness, dishonesty, and hypocrisy of the rabid right rings loud and clear.
@Ajay42302: welcome back, HoJay. George give you a new contract? Look at it this way. The new health care bill can not be as bad as what we had. Only the dumbocraps could write something that bad. Why should we care what’s in it? It has to be better than what we had.
Did Phulof get his terms squared away also?