Ryan plan: more statism.
Paul-Sanford plan: a step in the right direction.
PING!
Repeal the ACA completely. The states that chose to expand Medicaid will need to find additional sources of funding. Not federal government money. However, patients under treatment, must be transitioned, not dropped.
The Rand Paul/Sanford plan does the best of the competing plans I have heard of to lessen federal government involvement and give the consumer more freedom. As the author says, the Paul Ryan plan is another federal government Frankenstein monster tied up in a Republican bow—ObummerCare Lite.
Told ya so. Ryan has too much financially invested in maintaining obamacare to let it go. Any “plan” that does not totally repeal is a fraud. I expect the Republicans to end up with Single Payer as a “total repeal,” though. “We can’t allow people to lose their insurance,(sniff). The oratory here all assumes that Insurance is the requirement, not medical care. If everyone has “insurance” but can’t get anything for it or it impoverishes them be keeping medical costs high and deductibles super high, the pols have succeeded so long as everyone is “covered” on paper.
someone tell rand that the election is over. he’s still way too in love with the cameras.
The Ryan plan is doomed. It already has three Republican Senators against it — Rand paul, Mike Lee, and Ted Cruz (the three you’d expect.) I wouldn’t be surprised to see Ben Sasse join them.
I don’t trust Paul Ryan. I don’t like him and being speaker makes it more pronounced.... he appears to know more than he’s saying and what he says is probably not the truth, ...I don’t know if any politician is capable of being honest and above board. I don’t know what he has up his sleeve on healthcare, but I don’t think it’s anything good or what was promised. Keeping it under lock and key should tell us something is not according to hoyle.
Their plan is better, but both plans in a way further distort the healthcare market for the worse. Simply any favorable tax treatment for health insurance payments raises costs. We have that currently with the tax deduction for employer-provided coverage. In that sense, the “Cadillac tax” at least makes a start in pulling that back. But either the tax credit that Ryan’s plan has and the tax deduction that Paul’s plan has equalize the market in the wrong direction by expanding that to non-employer plans. The only correct way to deal with that is to start phasing out the special tax treatment for employer-provided coverage (even if non-employer coverage is given equal treatment during the phase out).
What we’ve got and what people who are actually being subjected to that they find so odious is that Obamacare as it stands is tantamount to old catastrophic coverage with a very high deductible but they’re not getting anything in return for that very high deductible, it’s still a very expensive policy, and they’re forced under penalty of law and financial penalty to buy this inferior policy. That’s the problem in a nutshell for people who are in the difficult position of actually having to deal with this boondoggle on the exchange. Arguing back and forth over fine points of political principal is going to be lost on most. Solve the problem of being able to have decent medical insurance at a price that is acceptable. If that involves government at some level, and I don’t see how it can’t with preexisting conditions and indigent care, then so be it. The Ryan bill does not solve this it actually increases the penalty, but it’s not forced by law currently even though the door appears to remain open. On principal the Paul bill is much more appealing, however if principal does not get the above problem for actual policy holders in the exchange solved, it will be just as hated and just as much of a failure as Obamacare but hung around the necks of conservatives.