Could Rand Paul End Up Saving Obamacare?

[rprprs]

Congressional Democrats are planning a blizzard of publicity events and delaying tactics to try to block the Republicans’ drive to repeal the Affordable Care Act in the coming weeks, although few give them much chance of success.

Arguably the Democrats’ longest of long-shots in slowing or sidetracking the Obamacare repeal legislation is the effort of Sen. Rand Paul, the libertarian, free-spirted Republican from Kentucky who unsuccessfully challenged Donald Trump for the GOP presidential nomination.

Paul, 53, is one of at least three Republican senators who have said it might be a colossal mistake for the Republicans to forge ahead with repealing Obamacare without a replacement plan ready in the wings to avert upheaval in the health insurance industry and prevent millions of Americans from losing their coverage.


more... https://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2017/...ving-Obamacare

[The Northbreather]

And by replacement he means the nothing but the market

[CaptUSA]

In this case, when you remove a cancer, what do you replace it with?

[PierzStyx]

In this case, when you remove a cancer, what do you replace it with?

Quoting it all just so it can be repeated and read again by everyone scrolling past.

[specsaregood]

In this case, when you remove a cancer, what do you replace it with?

You should read Randals statement on what he wants to replace it with:

By Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)
What should we replace Obamacare with? Perhaps we should try freedom:

1. The freedom to choose inexpensive insurance free of government dictates.

2. The freedom to save unlimited amounts in a health savings account.

3. The freedom to buy insurance across state lines.

4. The freedom for all individuals to join together in voluntary associations to gain the leverage of being part of a large insurance pool.

[enhanced_deficit]

That would be a mistake, hopefully Rand won't play into Dems hands on this issue.

... Republicans’ drive to repeal the Affordable Care Act in the coming weeks,...

That seems like fake new name, don't know anyone who sees it as "affordable". SWCcare or DGPcare is far more accurate name.

[ILUVRP]

i think it is very easy to do , just give the american people what members of congress and their staff have .

[William Tell]

In this case, when you remove a cancer, what do you replace it with?

Yeah. Obamacare is only part of the government control of healthcare cancer though. When the establishment talks about replacement they mean more control. When Rand talks about replacement he means getting the government even more out of the way.

[Feeding the Abscess]

In this case, when you remove a cancer, what do you replace it with?

Many Republicans are willing to leave the pre-existing conditions and age 26 provisions while stripping the mandate. While the mandate is horrible, it's the only mechanism keeping costs relatively reasonable. It's not entirely wrong to say that the GOP is potentially planning to replace Obamacare with something worse.

[jmdrake]

Many Republicans are willing to leave the pre-existing conditions and age 26 provisions while stripping the mandate. While the mandate is horrible, it's the only mechanism keeping costs relatively reasonable. It's not entirely wrong to say that the GOP is potentially planning to replace Obamacare with something worse.

Hmmmm...maybe. Maybe not. How many people have been driven to get subsidized insurance because of the "mandate" who otherwise would have said "Thanks but no thanks" to the subsidy? How many are saying "Screw it" to the mandate and just paying the fine? How many have decided to just drop out of the economy altogether?

[nikcers]

Hmmmm...maybe. Maybe not. How many people have been driven to get subsidized insurance because of the "mandate" who otherwise would have said "Thanks but no thanks" to the subsidy? How many are saying "Screw it" to the mandate and just paying the fine? How many have decided to just drop out of the economy altogether?

Most people that sign up for the plan take more money out then they put into it. The republican plan is going to take more money out. If you don't put money back into those insurance companies pockets then eventually they will run out of money in their pocket.

[pcosmar]

Of course it will be renamed. and Profits shifted.

and insurance corporations will still run it.

and that is what created the problem in the first place.

[Feeding the Abscess]

Hmmmm...maybe. Maybe not. How many people have been driven to get subsidized insurance because of the "mandate" who otherwise would have said "Thanks but no thanks" to the subsidy? How many are saying "Screw it" to the mandate and just paying the fine? How many have decided to just drop out of the economy altogether?

The subsidized insurance and mandated purchase of insurance (and the fines, even) is underwriting the policies of those previously too sick to receive healthcare at anything resembling affordable for the average person. Removing the mandate and subsidies may well collapse the insurance system and bring about a more highly controlled form of insurance; perhaps even single-payer.

Such an action fits well into the mold of reform that carelessly strips away pieces of government interference without regard for potential consequences, so I might not even need to open my kitchen drawer and retrieve any foil to conceive of nefarious intentions on the part of the GOP.