Posted on 04/03/2017 6:56:49 PM PDT by springwater13
The White House is expected to release the text of a new deal on Tuesday that would give states the power to opt out of certain Obamacare insurance mandates, in a major attempt to revive Obamacare repeal as early as this week.
Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., chairman of the Freedom Caucus, told reporters after meeting with Vice President Mike Pence and White House officials that he expects the text of the new compromise on Tuesday.
The compromise would allow states to opt out of forcing insurers to cover 10 essential health benefits in plans, including maternity care and hospitalization. The states could also opt out of forcing insurers to comply with a community rating mandate, which today requires them to offer the same rate to an entire geographic area, and bars them from charging sicker people much more.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
Not sure of the figure, but for conversational purposes: 25 or 30 million people -- many of them uninsurable and/or unable to pay -- are now getting their health insurance through Obamacare, plus all the young people who are now on their parents' plans. The status quo ante will not magically snap back into place with repeal. Obamacare destroyed that. In fact, none of the pre-Obamacare insurance policies, including those that cover most of us through our jobs, any longer exist. That's the problem.
There is a lot of rebuilding to do. That will take time, and it requires a transition program. There are straightforward ways to do this, but getting a majority of Republicans in both the House and Senate -- let alone 60 votes in the Senate -- to agree on anything is the trick.
I’m with the pragmatists here that say full repeal is unlikely. Desireable yes but unlikely. So let’s take a look at this latest project: (the key, critical component of it):
“Meadows added that the mandates for insurers to cover people with preexisting conditions and letting kids stay on parents’ plan until 26 years of age will remain in place.”
No one cares about “kids” staying on their parents’ plan until age 26. That’s a red herring. But the forced coverage of preexisting conditions remains and that’s key. HOWEVER there’s also this:
“However, the community rating mandate [which is being eliminated in this proposal] was a key driver for ensuring coverage for people with preexisting conditions. Without the mandate, insurers could charge people with preexisting conditions exorbitantly high prices, making coverage hard to achieve. A community rating, which forces insurers to charge the same rate throughout a geographic area, would ensure that insurers couldn’t charge a person with preexisting conditions.”
So fine! Keep the preexisting conditions mandate but GUT it of all practical weight and importance. Kind of like the current strategy against abortion: don’t really try to get Roe v Wade reversed but chip away at it with other legislative efforts until it’s practically meaningless.
I like it! And I’ve been one of the biggest critics of Trump/Ryancare around here in the last few weeks. I’ve always been a pragmatist though it was too much before. Now, this is good, this is an acceptable COMPROMISE, and really that’s all we can reasonably expcect from Congress.
And even this compromise tackles one of the major hurdles of Obamacare, eliminating it for all intents and purposes. So I’m “ok” with it now. Not perfect but life rarely is.
Now to read what others have to say. Perhaps I’ve missed something.
The waiver to be exempt from the community rating may be contingent upon susbsidies.
In other words, if a state wishes to keep the community rating mandate, they must disavow any federal subsidy that would help defray any premium cost increase.
THIS is key so let me be clear I agree with you and others here who raise this point. If there still remain subsidies for states that keep the community rating mandate then yes this bill isn’t a real change from Obamacare.
I’m hoping with Paul in the midst of these negotiations this key point isn’t being overlooked. If there are any FReepers from KY they should write him with this concern. I may myself but I don’t know how effective a letter from an out of stater would be to him.
It’s not a repeal, it’s a repeal and replace. Trumpcare v1.1.
>
Defund it or repeal it, why is that so hard? Yes, I will get the usual diatribes about the law, esoteric intricacies of congressional protocol, and interminable other reasons why we cannot do it, when it truth, no one in congress has the testicular fortitude to do it. Just repeal it, or defund it.
>
Hard? Only for those whom wish it to REMAIN.
When one gets the response(s) you note, there’s only a few FINAL retorts: A1S8 and the Constitution. Everything else is just noise.
Notice that nobody in D.C. is TALKING those retorts either....hence you 1st point.
“It’ll only work if the states have to pay the subsidies”
There you go. You said it.
Oklahoma probably. In two elections not a single county was carried by Obama. I don't think any other state can say that.
Per Rand Paul. Conservatives want 100% repeal, moderates want 80.. let’s vote for 90% repeal and be done with it. I am calling Meadows to see if the management amendment is still present to undermine the health of needy veterans. I want a durned answer! Who are these exemptocrats trying to fool? They are saving Obamacare.
Good point! Remember when Republicans during Obama's reign said that they would defund CommieCare if they couldn't repeal it? Lies, as usual.
Now, we have a president who is more likely to approve a bill defunding O-Care. Will they do it? Do they think we've forgotten?
It that what you meant?
Ok, then I agree. ;)
That returns the power - and responsibility - to each state.
“This sounds like the Susan Collins bill in the Senate. Blue states get to keep their Obamacare and Red states get the full repeal.”
If you are allowed to buy across state lines and do not have to buy unnecessary coverage (I doubt I am having a child anytime soon), I could live with this.
Rand Paul is a repeal-and-replace advocate. So if he's repealing 100% of Obamacare and re-enacting 80% of it as Trumpcare then are we really a whole lot better off?
That’s what the founder of FR and many members want.
But a TON of FReepers love Obamacare Lite, and don’t want it repealed.
Sad to see that on FR.
Full repeal: This is the starting place.
That was a quote from him 90% is not. 100% repeal. So if you think he is still full repeal, read his twitter feed today 90%..
Yes, it helps us get out of Ebolascare, but won’t we normal people still be net subsidizing the takers in the blue states?
Being collectivist communist scum SHOULD hurt. They’re not bright, it has to.
Let’s see a flat out repeal bill, where every so called “Republican”, is forced to individually go on record with a recorded vote by name.
How convenient that the excuse is always used that a current bill will fail, so no one can go on record with an against vote.
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.