Posted on 05/10/2014 10:24:33 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
There are plenty of reasons Republicans can't get their opposition to the health care law straight.
More and more, I think Republicans are in for a health care crack-up. After four years of promising to “repeal and replace” Obamacare, without specifying what they would replace it with, GOP leaders find themselves under increasing pressure to put up or shut up. And yet their own internal policy divisions will result either in a failure to unite around a plan, which could diminish their chances of taking the Senate in November, or in a plan that not all Republicans like, which could have the same effect.
And no matter how the GOP fares in November — even if it should somehow wipe the floor with Democrats — President Obama’s veto pen will still be there, waiting to stop any plan they can manage to put on his desk. This will make the fainter-hearted among their ranks skittish about the whole “repeal” project. Why not work with the president to “get something done”? Why not — yes — “fix” Obamacare?
In short, Republicans appear to be damned if they do and damned if they don’t.
New polling by McLaughlin & Associates confirms that, if GOP candidates want to make health care resonate with voters, they need more than a slogan, they need a specific alternative. These new numbers show that, “By a three-to-one margin, 48 percent to 17 percent, voters were more likely to vote for Republicans who would repeal and replace Obamacare if they also proposed a new plan of their own to improve health care.” A hypothetical Republican candidate running on “repeal and replace” beats a Democratic candidate running on “retain but fix,” 47 percent to 43 percent, if he also offers a “replace” plan that voters find appealing and credible.
(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.com ...
And exactly why does there need to be a “plan” for responsible adults to purchase health insurance? Every insurance company had several plans before the idiot-in-chief started screwing with it. Here’s a novel idea-how about people being responsible for their own “plans”?
I would agree with the GOP that there would be no need for the government to get involved in insurance, if the government weren’t in the process of sending millions of American jobs to other countries.
One single generation America was head and shoulders above the rest of the world.
Now we are nearly 18 trillion dollars in debt, we import everything from China, and nobody is doing one darned thing to change any of that.
Bring back JOBS to America.
Then we can talk about insurance. But the big issue is currently that American jobs are being exported every single day.
Of course its BS but tell that to the usual low information voter.
RE: “You say you want to eliminate health coverage under Obamacare but you have nothing to replace it with.”
The GOP actually has SEVERAL plans to repeal and replace Obamacare.
Their problem is exactly that -— TOO MANY PROPOSALS.
They have to coalesce around ONE PLAN and present that plan to the public in a COHERENT way.
I don’t live or work in a city-out here contract labor or self-employment is the way we make a living, and the issues aren’t the same in Texas as in heavily populated cities in northern states.
I know that is your issue-and I’d love to see it happen, but unless the corporate tax rate is reduced and the union stranglehold on large companies-mostly those that manufacture goods-is broken, more and more jobs are going to be exported.
Those jobs that are already exported are gone for good-they are not going to be brought back no matter what happens because the wage rates of industries here are just too high, and Odumbass is beating the drums to hike wages-it is too late to undo the harm.
I buy goods produced overseas because I can’t afford what is produced here-so does everyone I know. That genie cannot be put back in the bottle-you can thank the unions for that...
When I was a kid, most civilian employers didn’t provide insurance-my dad had it, but he was in the military. Private industry probably should not have invested so heavily in the business of offering insurance coverage-it appears to me that was just an invitation to big brother to control and regulate another employer benefit.
The only overseas employers bringing jobs here are auto manufacturers, and they certainly aren’t going to unionized states...
We don't need nor want a National health Care whether Dem version or GOP version.
Unfortunately, “Get the US Government Out of Healthcare” won’t be a winning platform.
The US government is already too entrenched in healthcare to take it out overnight.
What are you going to do? Dismantle Medicare and Medicaid? That would ensure PERMANENT defeat.
The plan should be a SLOW but SURE move OUT of the healthcare business. In other words — evolution, not a big bang.
It took us nearly 8 decades to get to where we are today. It will probably take that much time to move the clock back.
The same bunch that ran the 2012 campaign is running this years .If the GOP really wanted to dump zero care they had the opportunuty to tell the public what was in it then.
http://www.theusmat.com
Instead they want to “fix it”. This quazi business publication USN&WR is fronting for that drive so the statists go make their move . Watch how quickly the GOPES will come forward echoing “we’ll fix better” after a few more “publications of record” bring up the agenda. Particularly if after these primaries the conservatives don’t dominate the senate.
The problem is that the GOPe think they should have a government plan too.
Isn’t that the truth-I’m always sorry that stupidity isn’t a shunning offense, any time I hear an Obama voter whine about what is “theirs”
Medicaid already takes care of the “poor”-and I remember when it was on a sliding scale, so that most everyone paid something. Finding an attractive way to market that sliding scale would probably be a good “plan”-hiring a bigtime marketing firm with a fantastic success rate would do the trick, and the website likely would not cost billions just to crash, either...
The same bunch that ran the 2012 campaign is running this years .If the GOP really wanted to dump zero care they had the opportunuty to tell the public what was in it then.
http://www.theusmat.com
Instead they want to “fix it”. This quazi business publication USN&WR is fronting for that drive so the statists go make their move . Watch how quickly the GOPES will come forward echoing “we’ll fix better” after a few more “publications of record” bring up the agenda. Particularly if after these primaries the conservatives don’t dominate the senate.
the big donors have line up lock step for hitlary.
They WANT to take healthcare off their accounting charts.
“they got theirs” and they want to rig the rules to prevent any innovation.
which jobs?
manual labor is dying because it is unneeded. Cheep slave wage labor is going to go away with robots (which have already done so) and 3d printing.
My job-when there is work to be had, is at least 75% manual labor-when I work for someone else, I don’t usually make over $10-$12 per hour, and if I’m working on my own, less than that, so I guess I’m cheap labor. But it pays the bills, and I will get work, while someone who is too good to bid the job and work for that price will not-undercutting them does not bother me at all...
It is not that the Republicans should not offer a legal basis for plans that are meant to extend affordable means of paying for various health care services. But government at any level should not be in the business of being the primary source of this payment for medical services.
Making the environment acceptable for a true market-based transaction in the purchase and distribution of health care services very much involves getting direct government involvement OUT of the transaction. There are actuarial risk determinations for practically every potential exposure to unexpected expenses out there, and in large numbers, insurances companies have found some kind of certainty in their investments.
Essentially, the insurance company is making a bet, that you will not suffer a loss from a predetermined source of risk, and you are making a bet that you will suffer from that risk being realized. Technically, you stand a chance of being affected by the risk becoming reality, but the insurance company actuaries know that out of every 100,000 participants, some number shall, in any given year, have the worst circumstance occur, and the insurance company pays on that basis. But for everybody else, it did NOT happen, and they “lose” the bet that year. Next year, of course a brand new “lottery” takes place, and again, there are so many that are affected per 100,000, while the great majority do not get a “payout”.
No matter how many are taken out of that hypothetical pool of 100,000 participants, the following year there will STILL be 100,000 participants, as the pool is continually being renewed.
Market-based transactions in the purchase of ANY insurance coverage, not just health-expenses insurance, is predicated upon the insurance institution being assured a profit over the long term. Any institution or agency that does NOT enjoy profit over the term of several years is soon out of business, simple as that. One of the most inexorable laws of economics, really. Nobody’s pockets are infinitely deep.
Subsidy is entirely different. For anybody to get something for nothing, or at least a great deal for very little investment, then somebody, somewhere, has to be getting nothing for something, or at least getting very little in return for going to great expense. And again, nobody’s pockets are infinitely deep.
Proposal: a major medical insurance policy for EVERYBODY, issued, of course, based on the relative risk for the individual, with a $5,000, or perhaps $10,000, deductible clause, and making the establishment of the $5,000 or $10,000 medical savings account for out-of-pocket medical expenses highly incentivized. Should there be government involvement, let it be at the local or state level, never at Federal level, and that limited only to a grant of money to either cover the cost of premiums for the major medical coverage, or the deposit to a medical savings account for medical costs that do not exceed the $5,000 or $10,000 threshold, or both, should the economic circumstances require that extent of compassion.
I have to go and do an estimate on the next road for the contractor I work with, and on the way home I will stop at the local dollar store to get Purina and Friskies brand cat and dog food at a lower price-and cheap, Chinese-made dish towels and makeup-”domo arrigato, Mr. Roboto”...
The 'pubs could've stopped Obamacare by not funding it. Instead, they wanted to save it as a campaign issue. Some (if not most) 'pubs wanted to save it in ways that guaranteed profits for their corporate sponsors.
I don't blame the people who passed this monstrosity. I blame the RINOs for not really wanting to get rid of forced national health care completely.
Try free enterprise.
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.