Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A Repeal by Any Other Name
Townhall.com ^ | April 1, 2014 | Debra J. Saunders

Posted on 04/01/2014 4:11:18 AM PDT by Kaslin

Should Congress repeal Obamacare?

If you had asked that before the botched Affordable Care Act rollout, I would have had a hard time answering yes. I didn't see how the scheme could work, but I also believed that Washington owed the millions of Americans who I was told had been waiting desperately for years for guaranteed health care.

Now I say, "What's in a name?" There's no need for a repeal when Washington is bound to revamp the law. The reason: Consumers aren't buying it.

According to the White House, more than 6 million people have signed onto Obamacare exchanges. Problem: The law kicked close to 5 million Americans off their private health care plans. Also, the administration says it doesn't know how many new plan members actually are paying their premiums, so that 6 million figure could be highly inflated.

At best, more than 1 million extra Americans got new private coverage, while 5 million individual policyholders got kicked off their old plans. Some won't have access to the doctors they were promised they could keep.

For many, the new plans are less affordable than their old plans. Industry graybeard Robert Laszewski found that many exchange providers "are just re-enrolling their old customers at higher rates." Call it the Less Affordable Care Act.

Individuals who qualify for federal subsidies probably will pay lower premiums, but only because taxpayers are subsidizing their plans. How is that more affordable for America?

Obamacare also expanded Medicaid coverage for 7 million uninsured Americans. Thing is, President Barack Obama didn't need to upend the private market in order to expand Medicaid coverage. The same goes for the highly popular but utterly nonsensical provision that allows adult children to stay on their parents' health plans until they turn 26.

Already the Democrats are gutting Obamacare. The administration has delayed provisions 38 times, by the Wall Street Journal editorial page's count. The White House even asked insurers to continue providing those "substandard" plans it had banned. Six Democratic senators have come up with a plan to offer consumers more choices, spur competition and increase affordability.

On "Fox News Sunday," one of the six authors, Sen. Angus King, a Maine independent who caucuses with Democrats, essentially declared the Affordable Care Act dead. "There's no such thing as Obamacare," he said. "You can't sign up for Obamacare. You're signing up for an Anthem policy or an Aetna policy or a WellPoint policy. It's private insurance."

The private market has had many drawbacks but one salvation: Until Obamacare, people were free to refuse to pay for a bad deal.

Months ago, reader Bob Duste of Glen Ellen, Calif., wrote to tell me that under Obamacare, his premiums had doubled while his deductible went up by 25 percent. His family can take the hit, he wrote, but he was "disillusioned with the efficacy of most government programs that end up being forced upon the unwilling as opposed to a last resort for the downtrodden and truly indigent."

Simply put, the Democrats didn't know what they were doing, but that didn't stop them from forcing their magical thinking on people who didn't want it.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS: 0bamacare; healthcare

1 posted on 04/01/2014 4:11:18 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
I get up early everyday, usually around 4AM. I keep the TV on at night and today it was stuck on World News Tonight something....an overnight network administration propaganda outlet....doesn't matter which network, really.

The propaganda reader was reporting that Obama was a last minute success, 2 million visitors to the website and they have signed up 7 million people - what they predicted all along. No mention of the 8 delays since it's rollout last year. No mention of the demographics (subsidies). No mention of actual payments. Just numbers - incredible numbers.

Even more incredulous, they attributed to the boost to an appearance of the ONE in an interview he did with Zack Galifianakis on “Zack Galifianakis Between the Palms” or something stupid like that. A million signees, out of thin air - all because of Zack Galifianakis...imagine that.

I doubt we'll ever know the real truth of it. Our RINOs in charge aren't interested in holding this administration to account for anything - they only have vehemence for conservatives and the Tea Party it seems.

2 posted on 04/01/2014 4:25:16 AM PDT by Gaffer (Comprehensive Immigration Reform is just another name for Comprehensive Capitulation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Simply put, the Democrats didn’t know what they were doing, but that didn’t stop them from forcing their magical thinking on people who didn’t want it.


That one sentence can be used to describe virtually every Democrat plan since I was born and quite possibly every other Government plan Local/State/Federal since the beginnings of the 20th century.

I’m Not to sure about the 1800’s but possibly even there too.


3 posted on 04/01/2014 4:35:31 AM PDT by The Working Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Today, there is ObamaCARE/RomneyCARE imposed
ONLY because the EXEMPT are exempt.

Undisputed Fact: BOTH Parties support statism and RomneyCARE/ObamaCARE.


4 posted on 04/01/2014 4:39:10 AM PDT by Diogenesis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

Obama Admin. loves to give credit to videos.

According to them:

One video miraculously “caused” the attack on our Benghazi consulate.

A second video miraculously “caused” ObamaCare to get to the “7 million enrollees” milestone.

If only life were really so simple...


5 posted on 04/01/2014 4:41:24 AM PDT by syriacus (By inviting millions of undocumented immigrants to stay here, Obama's enlarging our carbon footprint)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I quit reading in the first sentence,when the ignorant author talked about how fooled she was…...


6 posted on 04/01/2014 4:54:54 AM PDT by C. Edmund Wright (Tokyo Rove is more than a name, it's a GREAT WEBSITE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syriacus
Good points.

The simpletons in the Obama admin like to conjure up "videos" to explain away their actions (or inaction):

<><> a nasty video “caused” the Benghazi consulate attack which killed four Americans.

<><> but a fortuitous video "miraculously caused” ObamaCare to reach the “7 million enrollees” milestone just as the enrollment date expired.

==============================================

Even if the terminally stupid accede to the Boobamba admin's laughable last-minute "six million enrollees" figure (which includes duplicates and incompletes), that means just 810,000 of paying O/care customers were previously uninsured......a paltry 1.7% of America's uninsured......

DUMMCRAT PROBLEMS ACCELERATE The sting of the electorate is soon to be unleashed----voters steaming from broken promises, the disastrous online rollout, hundreds of thousands of policy cancellations, sticker shock over minimal coverage, ruinous deductibles, fleeing doctors, chaotic hospital networks, plus Obama's self-serving changes and delays in the law to make himself look good.

FOREGONE CONCLUSION: Obamacare is a blunder of Ceausescuian proportions.

7 posted on 04/01/2014 4:56:14 AM PDT by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

“I doubt we’ll ever know the truth of it.”

They will, but we won’t.

The Ministry of Propaganda is doing its job well.
(Herr Goebbles would be very proud.)

IMHO


8 posted on 04/01/2014 4:56:56 AM PDT by ripley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Pay attention, close attention....... here is the way forward. You can tell all your friends and relatives.

Obamacare except as a tax, has essentially ceased to exist. It at the very least has been postponed into oblivion.

What is going to happen is the Supreme Court is going to render it gone. The Republicans will take control and assemble the various replacements out there into something that will pass.

The president will sign the new law claiming the old law was destroyed by an unreasonable and backward court. He will then claim credit for the portions of the new law that were in some way present in the old law.

It will end up a win win win

The winners...... Republican Congress, President Obama, the American people


9 posted on 04/01/2014 5:04:03 AM PDT by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 ..... History is a process, not an event)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin; All

Democrat Socialist President Franklin D. Roosevelt decreed wage and price controls on all US Companies during WW2.

To entice employees to join their company, increased wages were not allowed, but fringe benefits were allowed. Thus, partially paid insurance policies were offered to lure potential workers to join their company.

Not to be outdone, Democrat Socialist President Lyndon B. Johnson offered Medicare to lure voters to vote for his approved Democrat Socialist Candidates, including himself, naturally.

Of course the consumer pays for the insurance policy that a private company employee has with his company, and the taxpayer pays for all Federal Government insurance policies.

Thus, for private companies to drop all insurance policies that they partially provide for their employees will lower the cost of goods and services to the consumer.

In like manner, ending all Federal Insurance programs will lower the amount of taxes that the taxpayer pays.

Insurance is an un-neccesary expense for private companies.

Insurance is an frivolous expense for Governments to charge to taxpayers.

Private Companies should own and manage insurance companies who sell insurance to individuals in insurance pools set by these same companies.

Governments should be forbidden from offering any insurance products, as the function of Government is to provide a workable regulation basis, with NO conflict of interest.

IOW, the entity that regulates should not also be a provider of what they regulate.

__________________

Today the greed to buy votes by “both” political parties has bankrupted the entire US Federal Government.

Accordingly, the Democrat Socialists and Democrat Communists have joined forces to Nationalize 1/6 th of the US Economy to pay for their previous vote buying greed with the illegal passage of Obama Socialized Health Insurance Tax, or OSHIT.

Not to be outdone, the RINOs have their own replacement plan entitled RSHIT.

Candidate Mrs. Bill Clinton will probably have her own replacement plan entitled CSHIT.

OSHIT, RSHIT and CSHIT all have the common con-artist flaw that “the youth” will fund “the old.”

This will never happen as the taxes paid by the youth are minimal, and all Federal Programs are paid aways paid out of the General Fund.

There are no Federal “Trust Funds,” because the Federal Government goes broke 60 % into each year, every year!

IOW, whatever monies are left over from paying the expenses of OSHIT policy holders, will be much less that the Federal expenses to manage the OSHIIT program.

_________________

Thus, another income stream will have to be diverted from the private sector to the insatiable vote-buying greed of “both’ political parties.

I suspect that Obama is withholding approval of the XL pipeline to that all US Pipelines could be Nationalized to pay for OSHIT, RSHIT, or CSHIT.


10 posted on 04/01/2014 5:09:14 AM PDT by Graewoulf (Democrats' Obamacare Socialist Health Insur. Tax violates U.S. Constitution AND Anti-Trust Law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bert
I don't think it is going to be that simple.

While the scenario you presented looks like it could play out, I have yet to see anyone in government publicly demonstrate an understanding of the underlying problem that can never be addressed through any practical proposed solution. This country is simply facing a demographic distortion where younger/healthier people are needed to offset the higher medical costs of the older generations. The country's "health care system" is broken (and was broken long before ObamaCare) because it is an insurance-oriented system where the people with the highest medical expenses are a major financial burden for anyone paying those premiums ... while the people with the lowest medical expenses have to be naïve enough to pick up the cost of much higher premiums.

I don't see a solution to this that could pass muster with any voting demographic large enough to make it feasible.

11 posted on 04/01/2014 5:11:23 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("I've never seen such a conclave of minstrels in my life.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
“waiting desperately for years for guaranteed health care”

Stop right there. There is no such thing as “guaranteed health care”. How do you force someone else to cure you? Even if you went back in time, you could not force Jesus to perform a miracle?

Under ObamaCare, if you get sick, the only guarantee is that you will die.

12 posted on 04/01/2014 5:14:57 AM PDT by Flavious_Maximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

Dr Ben Carson has the plan all fleshed out. It will be the structure upon which the new system will be developed.
*****
Health savings account from birth; teach poor responsibility

Carson’s idea for health-care reform is Washingtonian. Instead of the technocratic behemoth of Obamacare, empower the individual. “When a person is born, give him a birth certificate, an electronic medical record, and a health-savings account to which money can be contributed—pretax—from the time you’re born till the time you die. If you die, you can pass it on to your family members . . . and there’s nobody talking about death panels.”


13 posted on 04/01/2014 5:15:27 AM PDT by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 ..... History is a process, not an event)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: bert

Much of Obamacare may go away or dramatically change, however, the additional taxes are here to stay.


14 posted on 04/01/2014 5:22:17 AM PDT by ozdragon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis

The Democrats drafted, made corrupt bargains, wheeled and dealed, and passed ObamaCare, the grandchild of Hillary Clinton, all by themselves. It was signed and implemented by a Democrat President of infamous ineptitude.

The Republicans were excluded from drafting it, got no wheels or deals, voted against it universally, had no role in implementing it, and intend to make condemning it a central issue in the 2014 elections. Numerous Republican governors balked at implementing it. Republicans have argued cases against it all the way to the Supreme Court.

What is your purpose in pretending that the above are equal? It’s like saying that (Satanic serial killer) Richard Ramirez and Otis from the Andy Griffith Show are equally criminals.


15 posted on 04/01/2014 5:27:18 AM PDT by Chewbarkah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Six Democratic senators have come up with a plan to offer consumers more choices, spur competition and increase affordability try not to loose their seats in November.

Six Democratic senators have come up with a plan to offer consumers more choices, spur competition and increase affordability try not to loose their seats in November.

16 posted on 04/01/2014 6:24:12 AM PDT by Arrowhead1952 (The Second Amendment is NOT about the right to hunt. It IS a right to shoot tyrants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

FYI - Romney passed a state law in a Blue State. Easily adjustable or repealable, does not need Supreme Court authority and is actually affordable. Obama passed a Federal mandated law with unaffordable rates, lies, kickbacks, penalties, waivers, thousands more IRS agents, invasion of privacy, death panels, etc, etc, etc


17 posted on 04/01/2014 6:28:25 AM PDT by rwoodward ("god, guns and more ammo")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

I agree with your thoughtful comments.

Massive immigration could improve the aging population problem on paper. In reality, it would compound other economic problems, since in aggregate contemporary US immigrants do not produce wealth, but require public subsidies. We can’t make up a loss in volume.

IMHO, our fundamental problem is that too small a percentage of Americans are capable of producing enough wealth to fund their own needs, including health care, at a standard “we” find acceptable. What percentage of workers actually pay taxes equal or more than their own per capita share (including their dependents) of annual US expenditures? 10%? How many actually are capable of subsidizing the aged or funding the commonweal? This is a very corrupting situation, at both ends of the income scale, which politicians would be loath to relinquish.

The social, educational, and fiscal reforms needed to fix this trap are difficult, and, as you suggest, impossible politically. So the Democrats will demonize and eventually expropriate the rich (well, the unconnected rich — they’ll exempt their cronies somehow and give us a class of oligarchs including themselves), liquidating investment for short term consumption, leaving a desert behind. It is sad to see this play out. We live in interesting times.


18 posted on 04/01/2014 6:35:20 AM PDT by Chewbarkah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer
The first thing that hits me is how anyone; media, congress or citizen can continue to call this thing a law when it its been changes, exempted, amended and delayed so many times.

I'm also taken by how well the media clouds the issue and keeps the truth of the socialist aspects hidden. I've visited websites in different states and found two things that I can't pinpoint:

1. -It looks like those who have poverty level incomes will get free insurance which is paid for by those who pay premiums. But the real discriminatory penalty seems to be that someone paying $6 or $7,000 a year will have a deductible over $5,000, meaning they will pay cash for most (if not) all of their medical expenses.
Yet at the same time, the guy with no premium also gets by with no deductible, so he rides totally for free. Am I seeing this wrong?

2. -If I am seeing this wrong and there is a deductible in some states for the lowest income policy holder they are going to be surprised to get a bill for the stitches on their cut leg, or their broken wrist. The low income guy who gets treated in emergency after a weekend brawl is going to be hounded with bill collectors and his credit rating will be another deterrent for potential employers if a job market ever materializes. Hope and change rides again...

19 posted on 04/01/2014 6:44:01 AM PDT by Baynative (Got bulbs? Check my profile page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Baynative

We are about to see some serious complaining and demonstration with these users finding out they don’t have insurance when they try to get treated. They don’t have insurance because the government hasn’t followed through on payment for the policies or whatever little they have to pay has not been paid, or it has not been acknowledged.

This will be followed by gradual withdrawal of any doctor or hospital worth its salt from these subsidized policies. They will identify which insurers, which types of policies, and which type of ‘patient’ (i.e., a subsidized leech)they need to steer clear of.

This will all push for a “mend it, don’t end it” effort which RINOs will wholeheartedly adopt and embrace. In the end we’ll end up with single payer (government) and we will be left at their mercy (ideologically, politically and physically)


20 posted on 04/01/2014 7:37:45 AM PDT by Gaffer (Comprehensive Immigration Reform is just another name for Comprehensive Capitulation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright
I quit reading in the first sentence ...

Then you missed this doozy in line 3:

... I also believed that Washington owed the millions of Americans who I was told had been waiting desperately for years for guaranteed health care.

21 posted on 04/01/2014 7:51:41 AM PDT by kitchen (Even the walls have ears.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: The Working Man
All any democrat (and increasingly republican) needs to know about any legislation is will it stick the wage earner with higher taxes.

To hell with any other effect it may have. Sticking their hands deeper into our pockets seems to be their only concern.

22 posted on 04/01/2014 7:56:49 AM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
I don't see a solution to this that could pass muster with any voting demographic large enough to make it feasible.

Old people are the most affluent segment of the market, and therefore should be the most able to afford the healthcare they need. But with all of the forces outside of the doctor and patient at play here, healthcare costs are so far out of line with reality no one can possibly pay their own way.

Its these forces - created by tort law, bureaucrats, special political interests - that must be dealt with before a realistically affordable system can be reinstated.

Unfortunately the only way to deal with these problems is to blast em out. They'll never loosen their grip.

23 posted on 04/01/2014 8:07:44 AM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer
"In the end we’ll end up with single payer (government) and we will be left at their mercy (ideologically, politically and physically)"

I don't think anyone has realized the huge financial burden that is being put on the upcoming generation of American workers who will feed government bureaucracy with their necessarily increasing tax dollars.

The big lie told through the media was the line about 30 million uninsured people clamoring for insurance. If that was even close to true the sign ups would be in the 60 or 7o million range already. Also, when it comes to acute or emergency care, no one has even gone without in America, insured or not. In the past if someone had to go to emergence and was not able to pay there were numerous programs set up to pay the hospitals back enough to stay solvent; some exceptions did exist along the southern border where people came across for the day to get treatment and the burden was too much to bear.

Now we have a big percentage of the population moving to social security that was once supported by a 20:1 worker ratio. Those people are drawing money out of an alleged pool that is now down to as low as 12:1 and going lower. Those people also will not need to buy Obama insurance because of Medicare. The young fools who supported the community organizer are in for a very rude awakening.

24 posted on 04/01/2014 10:22:22 AM PDT by Baynative (Got bulbs? Check my profile page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: bert

That’s a great idea. Politically, it would never get off the ground.


25 posted on 04/01/2014 4:58:27 PM PDT by Alberta's Child ("I've never seen such a conclave of minstrels in my life.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson