Under GOP control, Senate finally passes bill to repeal Affordable Care Act

Why is this so difficult? (Serious question.)

Countries around the world have universal health care, which manage costs, and reduce the financial hit (big time) for their citizens. It seems like only one country always has huge troubles with making something work. I'm not saying we don't complain about services that are covered, or wait times for elective surgery... but the triage process works for emergency stuff. The costs are tiny compared to covering the services yourself. Myself, I have only had to pay for Orthodontic work for my daughter in the last ten years (and with Employer coverage, that was reduced to 50% of the cost for me.).

If the argument is "But Socialism!!" then I think people need to understand that the real point of unregulated capitalism ("Screw you, Jack. I got mine!") is really not compatible with making citizen health a priority. It is compatible with letting hard-working people die in the street because they can't afford to pay oppressive medical bills.

Opinion: ACA needs to be fixed. No doubt. Proposing to repeal it with no better plan for what comes next is just blatant posturing (and destructive to progress). Someone should press these GOP pushers for details of their plans, and then watch the puddle grow at their feet.

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: hounddoghowlie



The house will definitely approve this bill. It will then be sent to Obama who will certainly veto the bill. At least the Republicans are trying to do something. Obama care needs to be killed so we can start from scratch to fix the healthcare system in America.

I'm with you on this one.
I can remember how well the old health care system used to work. My sister's first kid had a heart valve thing, because it was a "pre-exiting condition" they finally got the hospital paid off last year.
Who knows, they might have ended up sending one of the other kids to collage instead of paying for the one that died.
If there is one thing they don't need, its kids who can make a decent payday.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: Flatfish


Indiana

It's been my experience that most people who've realized huge rate increases, come from states with Republican controlled legislatures that have refused the Medicaid expansion part of the ACA.

Medicaid expansion is one of the main mechanisms within the Act intended to provide the very subsidies that would substantially lower their premiums, co-pays, etc..

IMO, people who live in those states should be holding their own legislators responsible for their current predicament instead of blaming Obama.

When I first looked at the map, I noticed that Indiana was listed as a state that has indeed adopted a version of Medicaid expansion approved by the ACA. (Kinda left me scratching my head)

But...When I researched a little more, I discovered that Indiana's Medicaid expansion program has some elements that are unique unto itself, (when compared to other states) and it didn't even go into effect until Feb. 1st of this year.

That being said, it would appear that the real cause for your increase in premiums is probably rooted in your state legislature's failure to act in a responsible & timely manner to protect the interest of it's citizens.

To put it plain and simple, I think your grief and that of many others across this nation, is a by-product of Republican obstructionism on the state level. That's why they say, "Be careful what you ask for...."

I'm hoping that you and the rest of Indiana's citizens will get some relief now that Medicaid expansion has been adopted in your state.

And IMO, that's about the best we can hope for until such time as we can totally eliminate the use of for-profit, private medical insurance carriers in the program and convert it into a not-for-profit, single-payer system.

The Senate bill wouldn't fully repeal Obamacare, but it would end some of the law's key provisions. It would remove the mandate to buy health insurance imposed on individuals and on larger employers by reducing the fines for noncompliance to zero.

Under the Senate bill, if you like your Obamacare, you can keep your Obamacare. You just can't penalize other people for not getting it.

originally posted by: DupontDeux

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: Metallicus

i with you on that, what i want to see is how congress handles a veto, will they have the fortitude to do what's right and override it or will they cave.

They need two thirds of the votes for that.

I do not think THAT is going to happen - for that to happen people who voted AGAINST the bills in the first place need to support the override.

Seems like a highly unlikely scenario to me - this is all for show.

HE can only veto it 3 times if i am not mistaken. just pass it three times.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: olaru12

What most of these GOP supports don't know or refuse to understand is that Obamacare was originally supposed to be a single=payer plan. Obama compromised and worked with the GOP to come up with the ACA.

When it came time to vote on it, the GOP threw him under the bus and has been playing the "evil Obamacare" card ever since.

One of the most shady, underhanded events in American political history.

YOU CAN SAY THAT AGAIN!

But it's much easier to just quote your post so everyone can read it again, so I did.

Thanks introvert.

originally posted by: Bennyzilla
a reply to: JohnthePhilistine

Cheapest ACA could offer me was $240 a month for basically nothing insurance except in name.

I'm 27 and healthy and have no immediate desire or need for insurance. Anytime I've had any illness since ACA become a thing I've gone to a clinic and paid for it out of pocket at around $250. Total. Since ACA began.

There is no savings in it for me because it's not a law designed FOR me. As a matter of fact I am the one whose participation in ACA was supposed to help supplement the cost of others who cannot afford to pay anything.

I didn't pay the fine last year, I'll not pay it again this year.

I sincerely hope that by this time next year the fine for being uninsured will be a thing of the past.

Yeah, and maybe Cancer will be a thing of the past too, but I wouldn't bank on it.

I wonder, what do you think your neighborhood clinic would charge for cancer treatment?

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: Kukri


You don't need a replacement for something that wasn't needed in the first place

Yeah that's right I forgot! The old system was working perfectly and everybody had free universal health care just like the rest of the developed world.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

The GOP is on course to literally destroy the entire health care industry.

How the hell is that ?

The entire healthcare industry was destroyed when the LEFT created medicare, and medicaid.

That accounts for over 100 million people taken out of the private sector.

That's right there the US government is the largest single health insurer in the country.

What could have possible gone wrong ?

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: DupontDeux

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: Metallicus

i with you on that, what i want to see is how congress handles a veto, will they have the fortitude to do what's right and override it or will they cave.

They need two thirds of the votes for that.

I do not think THAT is going to happen - for that to happen people who voted AGAINST the bills in the first place need to support the override.

Seems like a highly unlikely scenario to me - this is all for show.

HE can only veto it 3 times if i am not mistaken. just pass it three times.

And where, may I ask, did you hear that?

a reply to: Flatfish

Well seeing as my mother just barely survived cancer I can tell you from experience it's not cheap and I'm sure it's much more expensive currently than what it was back then as well.

That being said, I don't have cancer, and local clinics do not treat things as serious as cancer. You know that.

I will cross that bridge when/If I get there, but I'll be damned if I'm going to pay $240 a month potentially for the rest of my life on the off chance I get cancer. Also, the coverage I get from that $240 wouldn't cover a majority of the costs anyways.

Weak dude

originally posted by: Flatfish

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: Flatfish


Indiana

It's been my experience that most people who've realized huge rate increases, come from states with Republican controlled legislatures that have refused the Medicaid expansion part of the ACA.

Medicaid expansion is one of the main mechanisms within the Act intended to provide the very subsidies that would substantially lower their premiums, co-pays, etc..

IMO, people who live in those states should be holding their own legislators responsible for their current predicament instead of blaming Obama.

When I first looked at the map, I noticed that Indiana was listed as a state that has indeed adopted a version of Medicaid expansion approved by the ACA. (Kinda left me scratching my head)

But...When I researched a little more, I discovered that Indiana's Medicaid expansion program has some elements that are unique unto itself, (when compared to other states) and it didn't even go into effect until Feb. 1st of this year.

That being said, it would appear that the real cause for your increase in premiums is probably rooted in your state legislature's failure to act in a responsible & timely manner to protect the interest of it's citizens.

To put it plain and simple, I think your grief and that of many others across this nation, is a by-product of Republican obstructionism on the state level. That's why they say, "Be careful what you ask for...."

I'm hoping that you and the rest of Indiana's citizens will get some relief now that Medicaid expansion has been adopted in your state.

And IMO, that's about the best we can hope for until such time as we can totally eliminate the use of for-profit, private medical insurance carriers in the program and convert it into a not-for-profit, single-payer system.

Hopefully, I'm from Indiana as well.

originally posted by: Bennyzilla
a reply to: Flatfish

Well seeing as my mother just barely survived cancer I can tell you from experience it's not cheap and I'm sure it's much more expensive currently than what it was back then as well.

That being said, I don't have cancer, and local clinics do not treat things as serious as cancer. You know that.

I will cross that bridge when/If I get there, but I'll be damned if I'm going to pay $240 a month potentially for the rest of my life on the off chance I get cancer. Also, the coverage I get from that $240 wouldn't cover a majority of the costs anyways.

Weak dude

My father fought stage four cancer for 3yrs, went 5yrs cancer free and then it returned and eventually took his life. There is no way he could have fought that fight without insurance or ending up in total bankruptcy.

Did your mother have insurance?

You may be young & healthy now and I would never wish illness of any kind on anyone, but some things in life are inevitable.

Eventually, we all get old. Eventually, we'll all get sick. And eventually, we all will die.

If you wait too long to cross that bridge, you may find yourself penniless and living under it instead.

a reply to: Flatfish

Sorry to hear about your father. If everything else I say is childish and stupid in your eyes please at least know I say that with sincerity.

I just think your post has a lot of "eventually's"

Insurance was always a gamble that people made with their own health and finances, but the key was, you didn't have to play.

Yes I will get sick to the point that insurance will be important at some point. No I am not at that stage now, and no I cannot afford to fit something I don't need into my budget. My finances are nobodies fault but mine and trust me I put enough weights around my own ankles while swimming into adulthood. I don't see the benefit in throwing bowling balls at me when I'm already just above surface and punishing me for not catching them.

a reply to: neo96

Different? Yes. Destroyed? No. Destroyed in that sense is hyperbole. Hell to be honest, instead of passing ACA, medicare and medicaid work, they should have just expanded them into universal health care. BAM! Done.

originally posted by: Bennyzilla
a reply to: Flatfish

Sorry to hear about your father. If everything else I say is childish and stupid in your eyes please at least know I say that with sincerity.

I just think your post has a lot of "eventually's"

Insurance was always a gamble that people made with their own health and finances, but the key was, you didn't have to play.

Yes I will get sick to the point that insurance will be important at some point. No I am not at that stage now, and no I cannot afford to fit something I don't need into my budget. My finances are nobodies fault but mine and trust me I put enough weights around my own ankles while swimming into adulthood. I don't see the benefit in throwing bowling balls at me when I'm already just above surface and punishing me for not catching them.

I thank you for the condolences and sincerity therein.

In response to your post, I have to disagree with some of your assertions.

For starters, when it comes to the "eventualities" of life, no one gets to choose whether or not to "play." That's why they're called "eventualities" to begin with.

They may have had a choice of whether or not to "PAY," but when they choose not to, the rest of us pay more.

But let's throw that argument aside for now and let's navigate your chosen path, which is to wait until you need it before you buy it.

Without the elimination of "pre-existing condition" clauses held by most insurance carriers prior to the ACA, where would you purchase your insurance once you got sick?

Personally, I'm an advocate for universal single-payer healthcare and I don't believe that anyone should suffer hardship in order to have coverage.

But so long as we insist on keeping for-profit, private healthcare insurers in the mix, this is probably as good as it gets.

a reply to: yuppa

A bill can only be passed and sent to the president once. If vetoed, there's the opportunity to override the veto with the 2/3rds vote. If that fails, they cannot pass the same bill again. They can revise the bill, pass it, and send it to the president. But they can't do that with the same bill.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

I hope the democrats keep everything the republicans try to do from ever happening. Just like the republicans did to them. I'm sure now the mantra will be "up or down" vote. Hypocrites

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

If both houses pass it and the prez vetoes then he looks like the sourpuss who does what he wants. Go Congress better late than never.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

Is nothing but a gesture, as we know the president have to sign it, and he will not.

Just another joke.