Morgan

Repeal medicaid expansion, instead the proposal is for the federal government to allocate a block of money to the state for health coverage that states could use as they saw fit. Gee that sounds great! Doesn't exactly sound like less government to me.

People with pre-existing conditions are pretty much screwed, states would be able to obtain waivers to charge different premiums based on health status. Such waivers would effectively eliminate Obamacare’s protections, since people with prior health problems could be priced out of the market.

Previously the ACA eliminated caps, now these provisions would not technically be repealed, but the caps would be less meaningful in states that pursued waivers and did not choose to guarantee coverage for essential health benefits. Instead, states would be allowed to obtain waivers to eliminate the essential health benefits.

How is any of this less government which is what the right declares they are against.

Question, where will all his saved money go, federally or state-wise, as I assume the states will save, not helping the people and having the same behavior as the insurance companies...into their own interests, hmmm,possibly to the people who help them get elected and stay in office, and what about us...the people, I guess the sick just simply die earlier, no big deal, I mean they are just a d**g to society anyway right?

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

As long as we keep looking to free market enterprise to deal with this, we'll all lose - because - there's nothing free about the market and the only enterprise involved, is figuring out how to make us pay it more money.

vernon

Your question,where will all that state money go? I think i can answer that.the money is money that is not borrowed.that will save us at least a trillion dollars a year plus the producers will be able to buy insurance again that they can afford .

Morgan

One thing I've learned is when it come to the government the money is never saved, just redistributed elsewhere and a lot in the lining of pockets or increases in salaries. The money is always tax payer money unless it has been borrowed.

What they are proposing is for people to undergo a review by the state on whether or not you can receive medical financial assistance? I find that a bit dubious don't you? Most especially under a terminal condition, where the insurance companies can increase your cost right out of the policy, just as before.

buffalo Loc: Texas

Unless and until health CARE is declared a right for EVERYONE we will continue the dual system that health INSURANCE corporations have bribed their monkey politicians into creating while continuing to increase profits beyond the $500 BILLION annually they extort from the middle and working poor classes.

The only answer is Medicare for All paid for with taxes that would be LESS that what health INSURANCE premiums are, yet saving businesses and 95% of taxpayers money. And those that say it would be too costly are totally ignorant of the facts, or LYING!

Morgan

I agree Buffalo, but everything has an impact including doing away with health insurance and all the people they employ. We've become co-dependent on them.

buffalo Loc: Texas

So, because a few people would lose their jobs, we must continue to pay extortion rates to private, for profit health INSURANCE corporations? Where was all the concern when millions of US jobs were being outsourced overseas in the name of higher corporate profits?

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

Kind of like the argument since a few were uninsured to begin all had to ge forced into supposed health care to benefit everyone..

Seeing that reality we are now in a worse mess..

Do you support Sanders Medicare push??
Medicare for All” vision: a single payer health care system that would insure coverage for all Americans???

Isn't this where we are really headed and hasn't this been said for years?? A single payer plan??

Cap spending is an obvious at this point ...
The costs of bureaucracy and fragmentation and profit-driven motives....But, at the root of this issue is the incredible rise in what patients are being charged for the care they need, particularly for hospital care....

Hit that fraud is imperative to making any plan work, yet no one speaks of it.. They all get too much money massaging the system and steal blindly from Medicare now in place.. Will they be able to curtail that in order to make it Work?? Will they even try???

I think anything they come up is going to meet resistance.. E******ns coming and these people in charge so to speak aren't going to admittedly v**e against the citizen that will v**e them out too...

Morgan

I'm not saying that, what I'm saying is that everything has an impact, therefore other things need to be put in place in order to prevent a collapse elsewhere. T***sition should be adjusted so as not to cause a negative impact. And it is a substantial amount of people, but I'm sure many can be t***sferred possibly as a health care government employee, though not with the same potential of income.

buffalo Loc: Texas

Well, if your going to compare incomes of privately the employed and government employment, your way off. Government employees not only have better wages, their benefits are far greater.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/04/25/federal-employee-pay-benefits-ahead-of-private-sector-on-average-cbo-concludes/

http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/2017/05/federal_workers_make_more_mone.html

As far as CEOS and other overly paid executives and stockholders, I could care less.

kemmer

This Graham-Cassidy bill is even worse than the two previous. The only reason it's come up is because the GOP can pass it with a simple majority only until Sept 30th. There will be no discussion, no CBO score, and just 90 seconds allowed for debate before the v**e. It's bordering on criminal.

Morgan

It still may not pass as many realize they'll be cutting their own throats at e******n time. Fine with me.

Morgan

I could care less about them also, but it is for the best that we keep as many people employed during a t***sition rather than cutting people off and letting them hang in the wind, similar to what happened to coal miners. With some long-term view, people could have possibly t***sitioned to another energy industry.

GmanTerry

I have heard the exact same argument used for not going to a flat tax. It will put too many people out of work. So we are stuck in a crappy situation because moving ahead will eliminate some jobs? Those folks must do what millions of us have already done... find a new job.


Semper Fi

kemmer

Hmm... Why didn't they think of that?