Senate GOP files bill to shield Americans with pre-existing conditions

[Swordsmyth]

Senate (https://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/senate/) Republicans skittish about a lawsuit that could gut Obamacare’s protections for sicker Americans are pushing legislation that would enshrine those protections under a health care privacy law signed by President Bill Clinton in the 1990s.
The bill from Senate Health Committee Chairman Lamar Alexander and nine others is a way to shield the GOP (https://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/republican-party/) from mid-term attacks emanating from the pending suit, which says Congress’ decision to zero out Obamacare’s penalty for shirking insurance means the rest of the law must fall.
“This legislation is a common-sense solution that guarantees Americans with preexisting conditions will have health care coverage, regardless of how our judicial system rules on the future of Obamacare,” said Sen. Thom Tillis, North Carolina Republican.
Under the bill, parts of Obamacare that require insurers to cover people with preexisting medical conditions and charge them the same as healthy people would be enshrined in the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA.


With their bill, Mr. Alexander and his centrist cosponsors are trying to head off claims they’re coldhearted and pressuring Democrats to choose between their Obamacare-only approach and an alternative.
“Support for the legislation will separate those who really want to protect people with pre-existing conditions and those who would rather have a political talking point to scare Americans who are already worried enough,” said Sen. Charles Grassley, Iowa Republican and cosponsor. “I hope the former is more important.”
A pro-Obamacare group, Protect Our Care, swiftly derided the bill as a “scam,” saying the GOP (https://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/republican-party/) tried to loosen the protections during the repeal debate last year and stood by as Mr. Trump approved “short-term” plans, which don’t have to comply with the protection and serve as an alternative to Obamacare coverage.
“While they campaign on the lie that they want to protect people with pre-existing conditions, Republican Senators on this bill have already acknowledged they want to repeal the Affordable Care Act again if Republicans maintain their majorities next year,” Protect Our Care Executive Director Brad Woodhouse said. “If they think they can fool the American people, they’ve got another thing coming.”
Additional cosponsors of the bill include Sen. Dean Heller of Nevada, a closely watched vote on health care who faces a tough reelection bid in November.
The other backers are Sens. Joni Ernst of Iowa, John Barrasso of Wyoming, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Roger Wicker of Mississippi, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska.
Ms. Murkowski joined every Senate (https://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/senate/) Democrat and two other Republicans in dooming the Senate (https://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/senate/)GOP (https://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/republican-party/)’s repeal effort last year.

More at: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/aug/24/gop-bill-shield-americans-pre-existing-conditions/

[RonZeplin]

The GOP loves Obamacare. Pre existing conditions are the major factor driving prices up. Republicans are as worthless as Democrats.

https://pics.me.me/its-a-big-club-dooo-mint-rebs-news-donald-trump-5588494.png

[enhanced_deficit]

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/images/icons/icon13.png Senate GOP files bill to shield Americans with pre-existing conditions
More at: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/aug/24/gop-bill-shield-americans-pre-existing-conditions/

Jarvanka wing of GOP has already supported that, even MAGA guaranteed it:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4B5qJ_KbOe8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4B5qJ_KbOe8

With Bannon forced out, Jarvanka wing will have greater influence over policies.

[TheCount]

As I've said before, this makes no sense. You can't keep the parts of Obamacare which force insurers to insure without also keeping the part that forces people to buy insurance. It's both or neither.

[Zippyjuan]

GOP realized that the Affordable Care Act is more popular than they thought so they are backing off trying to dismantle it with the midterm elections coming up. (also just to note the Affordable Care Act is pretty much what Nixon proposed in 1971).

http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/403235-fox-news-poll-obamacare-is-more-popular-than-gop-tax-law


Fox News poll: ObamaCare more popular than GOP tax law

ObamaCare is more popular than the GOP tax law, according to a new Fox News poll.

The 2010 health-care law registered a 51 percent approval rating, compared with 40 percent for the 2017 Republican tax cuts, according to the survey released on Thursday.

The poll, which surveyed 1,009 registered voters, also found that only 36 percent of respondents approve of the way President Trump is handling health care, with 55 percent disapproving.

Congressional Republicans tried and failed to repeal the Affordable Care Act last year, but they continue to criticize it.

Democrats say the Trump administration has been working to undermine the law through new regulations, and Trump has taken credit for "essentially" repealing ObamaCare.

The less-popular tax measure was signed into law by Trump in December. Republican leaders in Washington have been praising the law's tax cuts for small businesses and individuals, though the issue has not gotten as much attention on the campaign trail ahead of the midterm elections in November.

The poll was conducted Aug. 19–21 and has a margin of error of 3 percentage points.



Words matter too. When asked about Obamacare, the approval rating was much lower than when asked about the Affordable Care Act which a majority likes.


Polls found that support for the law rose last year during Republican attempts to repeal it.

[Anti Federalist]

GOP realized that the Affordable Care Act is more popular than they thought so they are backing off trying to dismantle it with the midterm elections coming up. (also just to note the Affordable Care Act is pretty much what Nixon proposed in 1971).

http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/403235-fox-news-poll-obamacare-is-more-popular-than-gop-tax-law

Words matter too. When asked about Obamacare, the approval rating was much lower than when asked about the Affordable Care Act which a majority likes.

So, the body politic are mostly feckless, fickle, half-wits.

What a surprise.

[Zippyjuan]

Does this plan sound familiar? https://www.nixonfoundation.org/2015/11/the-nixon-comprehensive-health-insurance-plan/


At the beginning of his report, he explains that overall healthcare costs have risen over 20% since 1971, and that the standing average cost of a day-long hospital stay is over $110. On top of the rising cost of healthcare, over 25 million Americans were still uninsured in 1974. 40% of Americans who were insured were not covered for visits to a physician’s office on an outpatient basis, and very few private health care policies covered preventative services. Furthermore, less than half of Americans under the age of 65 and almost none of Americans over the age of 65 had major medical health coverage.

Nixon’s plan was designed to ensure that doctors were incentivized to work for their patient, not for the federal government or insurance companies. CHIP required no new federal taxes as all parties – consumer, provider, insurer, state government and federal government – had a direct stake in making this system work. There were three branches of health care available within Nixon’s plan: Employee Health Insurance, Assisted Health Insurance, and an improved version of Medicare. Employee Health Insurance would cover most Americans and offered at their place of employment. The cost would be shared between the employer and employee to reduce the financial burden on either side. Assisted Health Insurance was designed for low-income persons where the federal and state governments would pay any healthcare costs beyond what the insured individual could pay. An improved Medicare plan would cover Americans who were age 65 and over through a modified system that provided additional benefits. One of these three plans would be available to every American, but participation in the program was voluntary.

The benefits of each plan were identical for all Americans, regardless of age or economic status. These benefits would cover hospital stays, physician care, prescription medications, and medical devices as well as other necessary care. There would be no exclusion of coverage based on the nature of the illness or a preexisting condition. CHIP would also cover treatment for mental illness, alcoholism or addiction regardless of where the treatment is administered.

Nixon also argued that many conditions were preventable from an early age, therefore children should be included in the health care plan. This included preventative care up to age six, eye and hearing examinations, and regular dental care for children age 13 and younger. No family would be asked to pay more than $1,500 per year for out-of-pocket expenses, and low income families would pay even less.

CHIP mandated that Employee Health Insurance would be required to offer all full-time employees health coverage, while additional coverage benefits could be added if mutually agreed upon. Coverage would be jointly financed, where the employer would pay 65% of the premiums for the first three years, then 75% thereafter. Employees would pay the balance of the premiums, and federal subsidies would be provided to ease the cost burden.

Assisted Health Insurance was designed for any American who were unemployed, self-employed, disabled, or were low income. Under this plan, premiums, out-of-pocket expenses and deductibles would be relative to the income of the family enrolled. For example, working families with an income of less than $5,000 would pay no premiums at all. Higher income Americans could also acquire Assisted Health Insurance if other coverage plans offered unreasonable rates.

To improve the Medicare system, Nixon pointed out that Medicare, as it stood, did not cover outpatient drugs or provide any sort of limit for total out-of-pocket costs. CHIP proposed to offer the same benefits provided for others under the Employee Health Insurance and Assisted Health Insurance programs to those covered by Medicare. The limit on out-of-pocket costs would be capped at $750, while public funds would cover the difference for premiums for those with low incomes. In addition, the current Medicare program for the disabled would be replaced by Assisted Health Insurance, which would provide better coverage for those with a low income but high medical costs.

The total cost of CHIP would be just shy of $7 billion, where the federal government would pay $6 billion and state governments would pay $1 billion. Employers would pay $450 for each participating employee, while the average cost for insurance premiums would be $150. Tax rates would not rise, as Nixon was opposed to any comprehensive health plan that required a new federal tax. Overall, his goal was to reduce the burden of cost while simultaneously improving the quality of healthcare for all Americans.

[juleswin]

As I've said before, this makes no sense. You can't keep the parts of Obamacare which force insurers to insure without also keeping the part that forces people to buy insurance. It's both or neither.

Would u consider massive tax cuts with massive spending increases on the same level as this?

[TheCount]

Would u consider massive tax cuts with massive spending increases on the same level as this?

It's similar, certainly. This is Venezuela-esque; try to force corporations to sell their product to consumers at low prices in order to make those consumers happy. High spending and low taxes is trying to provide massive government to citizens without making those citizens actually pay for it.

[juleswin]

It's similar, certainly. This is Venezuela-esque; try to force corporations to sell their product to consumers at low prices in order to make those consumers happy. High spending and low taxes is trying to provide massive government to citizens without making those citizens actually pay for it.

Venezuela is dealing with a war economy and sadly you have to maneuver differently to beat the enemy. But completely agree with the rest of the post. Do not cut tax and spend it is even worse than the democrat version i.e. taxing and spending

[angelatc]

GAffordable Care Act is pretty much what Nixon proposed in 1971).

Stop fucking posting this over and over. Yes, Nixon proposed it. Yes, Heritage created it. But they tried to drive a stake into it when the GOP HATED it.

Why the fuck are you allowed to troll here? Please, tell me.

We've been here for 10 fucking years, and you're as bad as DOnnaY when it comes to this crap. Stop with the kindergarten-level explanations already. We outgrew that 8 years ago.

[angelatc]

So, the body politic are mostly feckless, fickle, half-wits.

What a surprise.


GOP realized that the Affordable Care Act is more popular than they thought so they are backing off trying to dismantle it with the midterm elections coming up.

Bullshit. If the poll is accurate, and only 36% approving of the way Trump is handling health care, it does not equate to it being a popular plan. It means that people are pissed that it isn't being repealed like they were promised. The GOP won 3 times promising repeal: first the House, then the Senate, then the Presidency.


The only people who actually like it are the deadbeats who don't actually have to pay for it. The GOP is spineless for pandering to them, especially in this economy.

[angelatc]

As I've said before, this makes no sense. You can't keep the parts of Obamacare which force insurers to insure without also keeping the part that forces people to buy insurance. It's both or neither.

Sure they can. But there is no scenario here which brings prices down, or even quality of care up. It's a win / win for the insurers' bottom line, because they'll have to charge more for the premiums.

[angelatc]

Venezuela is dealing with a war economy .....

LOL - Venezuela hasn't been in a war since the 1960's.

[TheCount]

Venezuela is dealing with a war economy and sadly you have to maneuver differently to beat the enemy.

Reality is not an enemy that you can outmaneuver.