Skip to comments.GOP On Health Care: Repeal Quickly, Replace Slowly
Posted on 06/17/2012 5:51:20 AM PDT by tobyhill
Congressional Republicans intend to seek quick repeal of any parts of the health care law that survive a widely anticipated Supreme Court ruling, but don't plan to push replacement measures until after the fall elections or perhaps 2013.
Instead, GOP lawmakers cite recent announcements that some insurance companies will retain a few of the law's higher-profile provisions as evidence that quick legislative action is not essential. Those are steps that officials say Republicans quietly urged in private conversations with the industry.
Once the Supreme Court issues a ruling, "the goal is to repeal anything that is left standing," said Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., a member of the party's leadership.
Beyond that, "we ought to go step by step to lower the cost" of health care, he added, a formula repeated by numerous other Republicans interviewed in recent days.
Across the political aisle, neither President Barack Obama nor congressional Democrats have said how they will react to a high court ruling that could wipe out the legislation they worked so hard to enact.
(Excerpt) Read more at npr.org ...
AARP is in the bag with this healthcare scam while zero tells us all these evil insurance companies are stealing from you. Kill the entire bill just as a smack in the face to those who decieved and defied the American people.
People need to face the fact that congress doesn’t really want to fix things.
After all, if they fix something, they no longer have a club to beat voters with in the next election.
No one in the insurance rackets believed the 30 million new customers thing. For them it was more about ‘their share’ ~ you can’t be an insurance executive and really believe there are 30 million “more’.
I hope you have enough to pay for a catastrophe. Your stance sounds noble but care for some bad illnesses can be hundreds of thousands of dollars.
They can have “their share” but it won’t include me.
judas priest man, if you have a heart attack you will be completely broke. You better put all your assets in joint names with your spouse. Be advised. Medical bills are the number one reason for people declaring bankruptcy. Health ins is a necessary evil to protect what else you may ever be able to pull together, your house for one.
I’ll pay them $10 a month. The law already prohibits hospitals from turning anyone down with life threatening situations. The hospitals have also been involved in this scam so they can also suck wind for all I care.
I don't know tobyhill, I hope he's rich, I'm sure he means what he says, etc., etc.
Most who choose this path deal with the reality of medical bills they can't pay by - not paying them.
Since we require, by statute and by tort law, that hospitals and doctors deliver the care, no matter what, and since we allow nonpayment, we are on a path to destruction - slow but sure.
Something's gotta give.
Again, I will not support them with my hard earned money anymore being they have been involved in this Socialist scam. I would rather die than give them one more penny of my money even though I can afford it.
I hope that you’re either a very wealthy man or win the lottery.
Romney's plan is to "repeal and replace" Obamacare with Romneycare. RINO's in the Congress plan to help him pass what they will tout as a bipartisan program, but they can't do so until after the election.
I am not rich but I can afford to payout whatever bills come in. They may not get it all at once but they will get it.
well, once my kids are grown I may do the same. Can’t see it now. Good for you. Anyway, what’s so great about doing whatever to simply stay alive in this stew? As a friend of mine used to say, you gotta die from something
It’s the principle here. If I get sick or injured I would rather pay the hospital and/or doctors the amount I’ve been paying the insurance companies. Since I haven’t been sick or injured, I have been able to save a substantial amount that I was paying to insurance in an emergency savings account.
When I was born in 1964 the total hospital bill was $85 which was about a week and a half’s pay for my dad at that point.
It certainly looks like you have a point. With the present systems of Medicare and Medicaid being now in direct conflict or competition with Obama Care, it is difficult to see how someone can complain about the demise of medicare especially when more than a half trillion dollars was removed from Medicare to “pay” for Obama Care.
How many folks are reading front page news about the demise of Medicare? I just got a letter from my congresswoman telling me that medicare needs fixing so it will not be lost for seniors. Just how many seniors wanted to be stuffed into medicare at age 65, anymore than being stuffed into Obama care without any recourse or choice.
By adding Obama care to the mix, government has jeopardized Medicare, Medicaid, and Obama Care programs IMHO. In reality government has no mandate or Constitutional authority to be engaged in the medical business or a thousand other things it is engaged in and now we are faced with the ultimate financial jeopardy by virtue of fiscal insanity in Washington, DC.
Frankly Scarlett, I’m ready for Medicare, Medicaid, and Obama Care to be declared unconstitutional and the real fix of reality to make an appearance. I guess that choice isn’t very comfortable for “We the People”. What it comes down to is this: A Republic if you can keep it, or Health Care. Now there are a couple of choices.
That attitude is one of the big reasons that health care costs so much in the US. Everyone else ends up picking up the tab when people don’t pay bills.
That attitude is one of the big reasons that health care costs so much in the US. Everyone else ends up picking up the tab when people don’t pay bills.
I have a 13 year old and have maintained his old individual plan because it’s grandfathered and I have no other options now but as soon as I can I will buy a very cheap Hospital Only plan with an Accident Insurance Plan. I will pay cash for any doctor’s visit for simple illnesses.
That’s very innovative of you. I didn’t know that emergency savings accounts existed. Do most banks offer them?
I would rather pay the hospital and/or doctors the amount Ive been paying the insurance companies. Since I havent been sick or injured, I have been able to save a substantial amount that I was paying to insurance in an emergency savings account.
That was my nickname for my savings account which is actually a 1 year CD that gets rolled over.
The Dems INTENTIONALLY prevented any fixes to healthcare from the early 1990s when Hillary Rodman Clinton attempted to seize control. They wanted the costs to skyrocket, as they knew that would create a push to ‘fix’ it in their mold, once the stars lined up (i.e., we nominated McCain).
Examples of fixes that might have actually worked would include the ability of people to simply buy high-deductible policies for major-cost health care, and not be also forced to pay for ‘mental health’, ‘chiropractors’, wheelchairs, and other items that deal with “first-world problems”, rather than real (and curable) medical conditions. The Dems blocked it then...and will continue to do so again.
That’s good thinking on your part.
I’ve done it for almost 3 years now. The first couple months I was putting it in my checking but then I found myself just spending it on other things so I now have it automatically go into a savings account then annually I roll the whole amount into the CD. In 3 years it’s over 10 grand.
I think Romneycare at state level has an individual mandate. Presuming Supreme Court finds the individual mandate unconstitutional at the national level, Romney can’t have the Massachusetts state plan expanded to all 50 states.
The only correct approach to this:
Repeal Quickly; Don’t Replace.
The government has NO business being in the health care business, and NO Constitutional authority to enact legislation such as this.
Now, we need to the SCOTUS to find the proper backbone to mae this government overreach go away.
Your post provides me with an opportunity to point out an interesting contrast.
On the one hand, people constantly mention that the hospitals are obliged to provide treatment whether you can pay or not. On the other hand, people constantly mention that treatment may cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Now, that isn't necessarily contradictory. But if it isn't, we're talking about accepting the current state of affairs -- socialized medicine -- and every man for himself, attempting to find a way to shirk responsibility for his own expenses and dump them on someone else.
It would appear that freeper tobyhill is one of the very few who are unwilling to participate in a thoroughly corrupt system.
Meanwhile, that system is only in its early stages, and everyone who participates, accommodates, or adjusts to it, is complicit in its advance to complete, dehumanizing tyranny.
But you all just go ahead and adapt, and don't forget to vote for Republicans who have no intention of simply abolishing the system.
The mandate is only viewed as a mandate if a “penalty” is imposed for noncompliance. If the “penalty” is changed to some sort of “tax,” then there is no mandate because the individual can choose to pay the tax rather than buy insurance.
Romneycare will replace Obamacare by using a tax rather than a penalty.
I will never skirt my responsibility but I will refuse to participate in the corrupt insurance industry and as long as they are involved with the corrupt government. I will pay cash, the good ole fashion American way.
My mom said it cost about $1000 to have me at a hospital. The hospital set up a payment plan and she had me paid off in about 3 years, shots and all.
Exactly. It is the proper, moral approach. And if the bill runs up to "hundreds of thousands of dollars," that should be nobody's problem but yours.
I will pay it out to the best of my ability.
I represented a client who was getting sued for $2800 for medical treatment she believed should have been covered by her medical insurance. I brought the carrier into her suit and was quickly advised that if they were liable, the most they had to pay the Doctor was $670 per his agreement with them. The case was resolved when my client paid $335 to the insurance company who then determined to pay the Doctor $670, eliminating his claim against my client.
So a doc who is willing to accept a small sum from an insurance provider wants to charge clients who pay directly four times as much.
I’ll bet the focus of their polling groups now is to try to come up with a single payer scheme they can message politically.
Catastrophic health insurance anyone? Does your auto insurance cover oil changes -tell you where to get your oil changed and set pricing? Insurance at one time was for exceptional expenses -nat ALL expenses. NOW it is a government promoted monopoly that funds a health plan that covers ALL expenses. In essence, the insurance companies and government colluded to remove the healthcare system from ALL checks and balances that a free market would provide.
Medical 'consumers' are now simply indentured serfs standing in line at the company store -with pricing and services ALL decided by centrally located elites. The healthcare reform plan was simply the final solution to a crisis created by the ones who claim to be fixing it.
ONLY useful idiots support the promotion and propagation of this 'insurance' scam.
I have the same philosophy, sadly I have lost absolute all trust in the medical industry.
I refuse to be part of any insurance package as I have seen first hand the ineptness of it, you always get the short end of the stick. If I have something major wrong like cancer or such well then I will get my affairs in order and so be it.
In some other country they make healthcare work, in the US of A it doesn’t and it would be many times worse if Obamacare takes over.
America does have excellent hospitals, if you are wealthy. Its just too darn expensive for the average citizen, good hospital care is designed for the more wealthy, some are more equal than others I will say.
Obamacare is touted to bring healthcare to the lower classes but the cost is even worse, they will decide just how much you are allowed to keep of your wages.
I had a recent overnight stay in the hospital for a minor procedure. The hospital bill was over $11K plus the doctors’ bills. What we need is a return to the major med plans to pay some of these astronomical hospital bills. And the law that requires hospitals to treat anyone that shows up in the emergency room needs to be rewritten.
Replace slowly? Replace?
That would highlight the difference - the only difference - between today’s GOP and the democrat party: The republicans will take us to the same fiscal cliff as the democrats, just 15 or 20 years later.
Siberian dilemma. (A russian falls into the frigid water under the ice. If he stays there, he dies in 15 seconds. If he gets out, he dies in the cold air in 20 seconds. What to do?)
While I value my health insurance, a lot of people here are beating you up for dropping it.
One thing they have to remember is that a huge portion of all healthcare is spent on the elderly dying in their last few months or year. Think Ted Kennedy’s expensive operations just so he could live another 2 months.
The fact is, if you save the large amounts you are spending on paying for health insurance, it is very likely you could afford most of the hospital/doctor/drug needs for most things. What you would lose is that last 3 months on life support or in that hospice dying.
Your idea is not all that bad. I wouldn’t do it but it could work out fine for you. It really is a sick amount of money we spend so the elderly can die slowly lingering rather than promptly.
No, I’m not advocating assisted suicide or saying that the insured shouldn’t get health care if they want it. All I am saying is that we spend an ass load of money on people at the end of their lives, and the upshot is not that we are curing them, but just treating them to delay death a few months.
Frankly, it is absurd. This ties directly to your post.
Given the choice of leaving a million dollar inheritance to help their children, or depleting a million dollars in savings paying it into the factory healthcare system, I am convinced most loving people would opt to die more quickly in a hospice and help their children with that million dollars, than see strangers in the medical industry get rich off it.
The reason we squander so much money keeping the elderly alive another month or two is because it is pooled insurance money. People don’t care because the money is already gone from their pocket in the form of 50 years of health insurance premiums. So they don’t care.
I’m convinced that is most elderly had to pay huge cash on the barrel head to stay alive another 3 months, most would reject the waste of money and would rather just pass into that good night they are going shortly anyway, and use that money to enrich the lives of their children, not strangers in the medical community.
So what you are doing makes a certain measure of sense if your insurance premium is high, and whose isn’t?
You might want to reconsider. Last year, my husband developed severe torso pain and decompensated in the doctor’s office (shock symptoms.) He was hospitalized immediately, and imaging indicated kidney stones. He received IV fluid and antibiotics overnight, as well as pain medication. The next morning, he was well enough to be discharged.
The bill was $12,000.
What people don’t realize is that Medicare and insurance drive the cost of medical care upwards, since providers receive a smaller amount than their billing indicates. I guess they have experienced that, if they charge less, the insurance companies will pay less, and the patients will have to pay the remainder, so it’s better that they get paid more.
I’ll bet you’re right.
Of course, it should be their choice what they do with their money. As opposed to paying oodles of money in premiums, to a government system which will still throw the non-politically-connected under the bus.
One of the unfortunate aspects of our current medical system is that people who pay cash are often charged substantially more than those who have insurance. So for instance if you need an operation, expect to pay double or more what an insurance company would be billed for the same procedure.
I completely agree.
My point is simply that consumers are apt to spend their money more wisely than government does.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.