Republicans prime the ground for Obamacare repeal – IOTW Report

Republicans prime the ground for Obamacare repeal

WashingtonExaminer-

Republicans are trying to prime the ground for Obamacare repeal with a key message: The law was failing anyway.

House Speaker Paul Ryan, incoming Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price and other top GOP leaders have kept up their barrage against the Affordable Care Act’s premium increases and reduced competition, even after their massively successful election last month.

“This law is hurting families in America,” Ryan said before Congress left Washington for the holidays.

“This law is canceling insurance plans people wanted, this law is giving people repeated double-digit premium increases, this law is raising deductibles so high it doesn’t even feel like you have insurance,” he said. “So you have to bring Obamacare relief as fast as we possibly can in 2017, and that is our plan.”

Aware that they would bear the blame if millions of people lose their health plans, the Republicans are trying to frame their planned efforts to repeal the healthcare law not as an attack on health coverage but as a rescue effort.

Coverage for 22 million Americans is at stake if Congress ditches the healthcare law’s Medicaid expansion, insurance subsidies and individual mandate without replacing them, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

That’s why Republicans are insistent that they plan to repeal the law, but delay its demise to buy them some time to come up with a replacement.

more

SNIP: Until it’s repealed, I’m calling it RyanCare.

17 Comments on Republicans prime the ground for Obamacare repeal

  1. Most of those covered would not be losing “health care” only “health coverage”.

    Their deductibles are so high they don’t get any coverage. And many have lost access to doctors and hospitals because of their plans.

  2. Why are these creeps smiling?
    Government and insurance syndicates have raped us for decades.
    Medicare fraud, VA fraud, Insurance fraud.
    How much is acceptable, 35% of monies spent?

  3. Now that these spineless assholes have someone to lean on (Trump) they can play like they are really tough. These bastards haven’t done a damn thing in eight years but you watch how they will try to take credit now.

  4. If the bungocare bureaucracy is stripped away, that should drop the price by a third. Drop the unlimited liability ceiling and it should fall more. Undo the one size fits all bureauweenie coverage – like forcing papsmear coverage for men, dropping boondoggles like viagra and birth control from coverage, allowing HSA’s to be used to pay the premium, allow plans across state lines, etc., and the price should come down. Insurance is (supposed to be) a shield from liability for unforseen events for which there is some determined risk. It is NOT so you can hand over a $5 premium, and get $500 in maintenance care.

  5. Agree with Oak Oaks though the only other thing I would add is to allow insurance companies to offer insurance anywhere in the country for the competition and allow them to draft up plans where people are not stuck in coverage for things they don’t need (Pre-Natal care for Seniors who aren’t having anymore kids).

    I’m sick and tired of Ryan and McConnell making excuses for delaying or fighting for things. I don’t want to hear anymore of “let’s wait 3 years and see if we can capture a 60 seat filibuster proof Senate.” They are freaking worried about these 20 million when there are 100 million seeing their rates go through the roof and can’t afford anymore. I would be more worried about those 100 million turning around and blaming me for waiting than action. That’s what you were freaking elected for.

  6. Ah, Insurance! The feely-good name for socialism. The reason seniors (like many of us) are paying for pre-natal care is, we’re paying for someone else’s coverage. This used to be a good thing when you were part of a ‘group’ that was tailored for your age and status. Now were all in the same ‘group’, paying for everyone else, no matter what their age and status.
    From those who can afford, to those who can demand.

  7. Burner, you nailed it.

    Insurance=Socialism=False Security=Limits on Freedom

    “He would choose Security over Liberty will keep neither.”
    How many times do legitimate claims get rejected? How many times do policies get dropped, through no fault of the insured? If you waste a life’s fortune on premiums, did you not give away the ability to fend for yourself?
    And the gimmes and the idiots exhaust the capital and the company goes belly up (esp if through fraud and fake claims), who lost?
    All this is too common with “insurance”? Does having insurance eliminate life’s risks?!

Comments are closed.