The GOP campaigned on the promise
that they would repeal and replace Obamacare. They had plenty of time to write
a plan to keep their promise. Instead, they come out with a plan that fails to
do what they said they would do.
Senator Rand Paul, a medical doctor,
has been searching for the GOP plan for days. When he finally saw it, he nearly
went ballistic, and he apparently has some basis for doing so. Edmund
Haislmaier “is an expert in health care policy and markets at The Heritage
Foundation.” He agrees that the new plan has some serious problems. He
discusses some of the problem in an article published at The Daily Signal
titled “House Republican Health Care Bill Misses the Mark.”
According to Haislmaier, the “key
problem with the draft House health care bill is that it fails to correct the
features of Obamacare that drove up health insurance costs. Instead, it mainly
tweaks Obamacare’s financing and subsidy structure.” He continues with this
statement.
Basically, the bill focuses on protecting those who gained subsidized
coverage though the law’s exchange subsidies and Medicaid expansion, while
failing to correct Obamacare’s misguided insurance regulations that drove up
premiums for Americans buying coverage without government subsidies.
That is both a policy problem and a political problem.
About 22 million individuals currently receive subsidized health
coverage through the exchanges (8 million) and the Medicaid expansion (14
million). For them, Obamacare’s higher insurance costs are offset by the law’s
subsidies.
However, that is not the case for another group of about 25 million
Americans with unsubsidized individual-market coverage (10 million people) or
small-employer plans (at least another 15 million people).
Those 25 million are the ones who most need relief from Obamacare, and have
the strongest motivation to politically support repeal and replace. Their lived
experience of Obamacare has basically been “all pain, no gain,” as they have
been subjected to significant premium increases and coverage dislocations with
no offsetting subsidies.
Unfortunately, the draft House bill provides no meaningful relief for
that group that is most adversely affected by Obamacare and most supportive of
repeal.
Instead, the draft bill leaves Obamacare’s costly insurance regulations
in place, and attempts to offset those costs with even more subsidies – a variant
of the same basic approach in Obamacare.
Haislmaier continues by explaining
that the new subsidy program is “particularly problematic.” It “substitutes new
funding for old Obamacare funding” without solving any problems. It does not “actually
reduce premiums,” but “masks” them with subsidies. It also “creates a new
entitlement for states” and sets the stage for extending and expanding the
program. He also discusses other problems with the plan. It does not decrease
the Medicaid expansion and may increase it. It does not do anything about “providing
more equitable tax treatment of health insurance.”
Haislmaier summarizes by stating
that “This bill misses the mark primarily because it fails to correct the
features of Obamacare that drove up health care costs. Congress should continue
to focus on first repealing the failed policy of Obamacare and then act to offer
patient-centered, market-based replacement reforms.”
There you have it folks. If you did
not like Obamacare, you probably will not like the House’s plan. Now is the
time to let your representatives know that you want Obamacare repealed in total
and you want a better plan. Do not wait until their bill is signed into law.
They promised to repeal Obamacare and must be held to their promise!
No comments:
Post a Comment