Trump Tells Congress to Repeal Health Care Law ‘Very Quickly’

Trump demanded that Congress immediately repeal the ACA and replace it. A tall order considering the ACA took 2 years to pass.

President-elect Donald J. Trump demanded on Tuesday that Congress immediately repeal the Affordable Care Act and pass another health law quickly thereafter, issuing a nearly impossible request: replace a health law that took nearly two years to pass with one Republicans would have only weeks to shape.

“We have to get to business,” Mr. Trump told The New York Times in a telephone interview. “Obamacare has been a catastrophic event.”

The vote is next week and it is unclear if Trump knows the timing of the vote. He is definitely determined and wants it done "very quickly or simultaneously, very shortly thereafter.”

Mr. Trump appeared to be unclear both about the timing of already scheduled votes in Congress and about the difficulty of his demand — a repeal vote “probably some time next week” and a replacement “very quickly or simultaneously, very shortly thereafter.”

As long as they start with repeal ... you'll all be better off.

Weep for me. I'm stuck with the earlier lie they sold us called TriCare.

a reply to: seasonal

There is no way to dismantle a program like that without already having the alternative setup and running

a reply to: seasonal

Repealing it was one of the promises that got him elected however, if repealing the ACA becomes a disaster, it could also lead to his downfall.

Trump can repeal my A## very quickly.

This world is going to hell.

a reply to: EmmanuelGoldstein

How about everyone start looking at Rand Paul's plan for the start of replacing UCA.

Key points:


1. The freedom to choose inexpensive insurance free of government dictates.

2. The freedom to save unlimited amounts in a health savings account.

3. The freedom to buy insurance across state lines.

4. The freedom for all individuals to join together in voluntary associations to gain the leverage of being part of a large insurance pool.

www.conservativereview.com...

a reply to: Throes

Not bad.

But still tainted. Let's go full socialism. It's 2016, we have no more jobs and Trump cannot bring $2/hr jobs in China back to America. It is not going to happen.
It's 2016, let's open the borders worldwide, choose a state sponsored religion, one currency, one government and get back to making great art and collecting your chicken eggs every morning.

FFS money should be outlawed already.

We're such a##hole animals.

a reply to: Throes

I don't see anything to help to control costs. Is that going to take place becasue of perceived competition?

a reply to: EmmanuelGoldstein

Care to elaborate a smidge?

a reply to: seasonal

That would take weeks of writing.

In a nutshell it comes down to this:

Are you fighting for your kids world or are you fighting for your great great grandkids world?

a reply to: EmmanuelGoldstein

I would think tat there are going to be similarities between both. But with so many unknowns it is really difficult to say.

What I can say is that $20,000,000,000,000 in debt is not going to make the next generations better.

But hey at least the guy from Volkswagen was arrested, who cares about the banks. We will find ourselves right back in the bail outs again.

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: Throes

I don't see anything to help to control costs. Is that going to take place becasue of perceived competition?

Yes, a more competitive market will decrease costs inherently.

a reply to: EmmanuelGoldstein

Socialism? When has socialism ever worked?

Whatever they do, the insurance comp reps say they cannot afford millions of sick people withhout subsidies. And rural hospitals will close.

a reply to: Throes

I've heard that, what I think will happen is the insurance company will pay this much, and the patient is responsible for the rest. And the amount the insurance will pay will go no where but down.

a reply to: Throes

Those are ridiculously vague. What are the specifics?

1. The freedom to choose inexpensive insurance free of government dictates.

Does this mean "bare bones" insurance that has high premiums and deductibles? And what does it matter if the insurance itself is "inexpensive" if the hospital and drug costs continue to skyrocket?

2. The freedom to save unlimited amounts in a health savings account.

Otherwise known as a tax-free annuity for those who can afford it. However, why would someone need a large health savings account if they have health insurance? Oh yeah, because insurance companies will be able to drop you again if you have pre-existing conditions, if your treatments become too expensive for them to turn a profit, etc.

3. The freedom to buy insurance across state lines.

Will those out of state providers also have networks in your state? Otherwise, what's the point unless you live on the border w/the State you have insurance with? Put it like this, suppose someone lives in New York but buys a cheap Mississippi health insurance plan. How many of the doctors and medical facilities in New York will be covered by the Mississippi plan? If none, then that person would have to pay the higher out-of-network prices.

4. The freedom for all individuals to join together in voluntary associations to gain the leverage of being part of a large insurance pool.

Voluntary health unions... That's odd. Don't health insurance companies and health care programs already have leverage because of their large insurance pools? That's how they negotiate lower prices for their networks in the first place.

Combined with #3, it seems like it's saying that once you buy cheaper out of state health insurance, you'll have to join voluntary groups/unions in order to try to negotiate for the lower rates you already would've gotten under normal circumstances. ETA: I guess they're voluntary because the new law probably won't do anything to help insurance purchasers on this point. LOL Buyer beware indeed.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Very good points. When we allow a monopoly to dictate cost they are not going down.

Trump promised to allow healthcare insurance to be sold across state lines. Time to get rid of the cartels and monopolies and bring back competition!

originally posted by: Throes
a reply to: EmmanuelGoldstein

How about everyone start looking at Rand Paul's plan for the start of replacing UCA.

Key points:


1. The freedom to choose inexpensive insurance free of government dictates.

2. The freedom to save unlimited amounts in a health savings account.

3. The freedom to buy insurance across state lines.

4. The freedom for all individuals to join together in voluntary associations to gain the leverage of being part of a large insurance pool.

www.conservativereview.com...

That is just more of the same and only helps that don't need health care. There are tons of people that need care

a reply to: dfnj2015

How does this bring back competition?