Posted on 08/19/2015 6:47:09 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Scott Walker is putting forward a plan to replace Obamacare that conservatives and voters generally ought to find very attractive. It takes a scythe to Obamacare’s regulations: The plan restores states’ pre-Obamacare role as the lead health-care regulators. The individual and employer mandates would vanish. The federal government would no longer determine which benefits are “essential” for everyone’s health insurance. At the same time, the plan would enable anyone who wants catastrophic health coverage to get it.
The plan has four key parts. First, Obamacare’s regulatory centralization would be reversed. Second, tax credits would be provided to enable people to buy insurance. These credits would vary by age but would not vary by income — avoiding a feature of Obamacare that has added a great deal of complexity and has reduced incentives to work. Third, states would gain authority and responsibility over much of Medicaid. Federal aid per capita would be capped so that states no longer had an incentive to spend more money. Fourth, health savings accounts, which allow people to save tax-free to pay out-of-pocket medical expenses, will be greatly expanded.
Obamacare’s two main political strengths have been that it provides coverage to a lot of people who lacked the income to get it, and that it protects sick people from facing discrimination by insurers. Walker’s plan shows that these benefits need not be tied to Obamacare’s intrusive regulations and taxes. We have reason to think that roughly as many people would get coverage under Walker’s plan as under Obamacare. Some of that coverage will be less comprehensive, but much of it will be cheaper and provide more financial protection.
Insurers, meanwhile, will be prevented from discriminating against sick people so long as they have maintained their insurance coverage. People will thus have both the incentive and the means to get covered. For those who are already sick and don’t have coverage, the plan provides for high-risk pools — but the need for them would diminish with time.
Walker’s plan draws on the best conservative thinking on health care and suggests that the party is in the process of building a consensus. It is very similar to plans that already have the support of the chairmen of the Senate Finance Committee and the House Budget Committee. Senator Marco Rubio has advanced similar ideas in outline form as well. Walker has presented the best plan yet from a presidential candidate, and we hope that other candidates will feel no compunction about copying him.
The fact that the RINOs/Apologists at National Review are all in for Walker, should be a sign for everyone.
Stadium Scott still has the federal government involved in healthcare.
Replace obamacare? Why? Was it ever the intent of our Founding Fathers for the federal government to be in the medical business, steal money from the citizens in the form of taxes and use it to shove unwanted things down the same taxpayers throats?
This should be left for the states to decide. If California wants socialized medicine, then great. If some central state wants no part of it, then great too! The feds just need to keep out of it.
FU Scott Walker!
RE: The fact that the RINOs/Apologists at National Review are all in for Walker, should be a sign for everyone.
Can you tell us what you think is wrong with Scott Walker’s healthcare proposal?
Two things I don’t see that greatly contribute to cost are missing that I think need to be addressed. Allowing people to shop insurance across state lines and tort reform, but reeling in the lawyers will never happen.
I still need to dive into it later in the week but at first glance I don’t hate but don’t love it either. I disagree with some here that we don’t need a replacement. We do because it’s not like the federal government wasn’t already knee deep in healthcare. We have to fix what was broken over 60 years. Plus, politically it is necessary to have a plan other than just repeal because the charge will be that we are ‘taking away’ people’s healthcare.
. What I don’t love so far is the introduction of new tax credits. I think it sidesteps the core issues and opens up a new endless growth in pandering. I look forward to diving in to this further to see what else he is proposing. I am willing to take some bad if there is a lot of good.
The best plan was to STAND with CRUZ in 2013. Scott and Carly and other RINO’s were attacking Cruz for Ted’s brave and correct defund move.
Scott and Carly are cuck campaign conservatives.
This is the same plan that has been in the Senate for months that was written by Coburn, Hatch and Burr. Since Coburn’s retirement, Tom Price has been advancing it.
The GOP platform will have many parents.
For starters he just adopted the plan that Senators Coburn, Hatch and Burr wrote. This plan has been around since late 2013, early 2014. Since Coburn’s retirement, the plan is being advanced by Tom Price.
RE: Allowing people to shop insurance across state lines and tort reform
Trump did present the former in the first debate but was silent on the latter.
No replacements.
Repeal everything, including the onerous regulations. Then let the free market work it out.
Let’s replace federal intervention and control of health care with a different version of federal control of health care
This idiocy is part of the reason why conservatives are always losing to the nanny state
Walker’s “plan” is the GOPe “keep the oligarchy” in place edict directed from on high. National Review approved.
RE: Let’s replace federal intervention and control of health care with a different version of federal control of health care
OK, we’re all ears. What do you propose to replace Medicaid and Medicare?
Exactly.
Turn it over to the states over a period of 4 years. Get the Feds out of it completely, including taxes and funding
I think we have a confirmed sighting of the backup to the backup for Jeb...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3326439/posts?page=19#19
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.