Posted on 09/20/2017 6:27:02 PM PDT by SoFloFreeper
The Senate faces a September 30, 2017, deadline to use budget reconciliation to repeal Obamacare this year. In the wake of the Senate’s recent failure to repeal and replace Obamacare, Senators Lindsey Graham (R–SC) and Bill Cassidy (R–LA) have released an updated version of their bill in a renewed effort to take advantage of this expiring legislative vehicle.
Like others considered this year, Graham–Cassidy falls short of fully repealing Obamacare and replacing it with a new patient-centered system, but it does include significant improvements over current law by repealing the individual and employer mandate tax penalties, providing Medicaid reform, and empowering states to design health care subsidies and insurance rules that work for their residents.
The Senate should also ensure that the bill is changed to support the goal stated in the legislative text: creating a “market-based healthcare grant program.” Even with the changes recommended here, it is important to remember that this bill would be only a first step in the long-term effort necessary to achieve a truly patient-centered health care system
(Excerpt) Read more at heritage.org ...
1.Graham–Cassidy makes it easier for states to waive Obamacare insurance mandates, including several mandates most responsible for driving up health care premiums.
2.Graham–Cassidy helps to refocus Medicaid on those who are most in need. These changes would put federal financing of Medicaid on a sustainable path.
3. But the Senate should ensure that the bill is changed to fulfill the goal stated in the legislative text: creating a “market-based healthcare grant program.”
In short, Members of Congress should not be under any illusion that passing Graham–Cassidy relieves them of the burden of continuing to reform the health care system in a more patient-centered, market-based direction.
When the Dems eventually regain power, they will tweak it to their liking. That is why it must only be REPEAL and NO REPLACE.
One of the biggest costs is hospital administration. It isn’t done for better patient care ... it’s too avoid lawsuits OR to code things in a manner that the hospital gets reimbursed from insurance companies. But fear of being sued and malpractice costs drive a lot of the direct costs as well as the need for bureaucracy.
My solution:
- If you’re receiving free healthcare and you feel that you were harmed by negligence, you may pursue your complaint in front of a knowledgeable board staffed by MDs, who is empowered to suspend the license of the practitioner and also has is empowered to award compensation. However, the compensation will be minimal and will no longer be like hitting the lottery.
- If you take part in a scheme to defraud private or public insurance, then you are ineligible for public insurance for a period of not less than 15 years.
- If you are asked to take part in a scheme to defraud private or public insurance, and you turn them in, then you can split up to 5% of the fines / money recovered
- No free phones, gas, transportation, electricity, meals, etc.
More than anything else, this Cassidy-Graham bill removes INDIVIDUAL & EMPLOYER MANDATES to buy government dictated features in every insurance policy.
That does more for freedom of choice in health insurance than anything else.
1.Graham–Cassidy makes it easier for states to waive Obamacare insurance mandates, including several mandates most responsible for driving up health care premiums.
Actually, it does not. It imposes more federal control and allocation of dollars of what is spent on so-called pre-existing conditions that will be further litigated and agitated by leftist groups.
2.Graham–Cassidy helps to refocus Medicaid on those who are most in need. These changes would put federal financing of Medicaid on a sustainable path.
Why not just turn Medicare/Medicaid over to the states to begin with instead of confiscating state tax dollars to go to Washington and then get redistributed anyway?
3. But the Senate should ensure that the bill is changed to fulfill the goal stated in the legislative text: creating a “market-based healthcare grant program.”
Republicans ran on full repeal, not "conservatizing" liberalism. Go to the source of the problem. Fedgov has no constitutional authority in healthcare.
Which will be easily be put back into place when Dems successfully hang the remnants of Obamacare around the Stupid Party's necks and reclaim Congress and then usher in Berniecare for all.
If and when Rats get back in majority, they can pass mother of Obamacare.
This is only partial replace with no repeal whatsoever.
Linda Graham’s joke of a law is obamacare 2.0. You still end up giving premiums free to others but buying you own. I don’t want to pay for others. There is no right to health care insurance premiums. Buy if you want it!!Obtain a job and seek priorities as to your expenditures . If you want health insurance BUY IT YOUR SELF.I did nott take you to raise and I sure don’t care what you do yourself in a free country.God Bless the defeat of this socialized medicine. Who cares whether states or feds steal your money?
What does the bill say? Why can we not read it and advise our legislator what to do?
4. It’s 95% obamacare- Come on everybody, We gotta pass something so we don’t look so stupid and worthless!
Exactly - but it would be a small step in the right direction.
So the left and east coast go full single payer.. it will fail. Why should we bail them out..
This bill bails out insurance companies and spends more and more money.
I heard the block grants will be evenly distributed, so they want you to believe that for every one dollar California get, Mississippi gets one dollar. Do you really believe that? Would you envision any math that would call that a probability?
These states can’t manage their Medicaid? Why do they get more spending?
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.