GOP Says Blue States Can Keep Their Health Care. Red State Deplorables Are on Their Own (WOW)

[DemocratSinceBirth]

GOP senators introducing ObamaCare replacement Monday


GOP Sens. Susan Collins (Maine) and Bill Cassidy (La.) are planning to offer an ObamaCare replacement proposal next week as lawmakers gear up to repeal the law.

Collins said they will introduce their legislation on Monday, noting it would be based on a 2015 proposal and give states more flexibility.

"We recognize how different the needs of our states are, but our citizens should have access to affordable health care and to choose the path that works best for them," Collins said.

...

The money shot:

She added that they would be releasing more details, but that it would allow (blue*) states to keep the Affordable Care Act if they like it or go an "alternative route" with funding previously earmarked for the ACA

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/314724-gop-senators-introducing-obamacare-replacement-monday



* I inserted it


Thank God I live in California where we take care of our own:

[Fast Walker 52]

1. so it's optional ACA? WTF?

it doesn't make much sense. Red states will just take the money and do what with it?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

2. Thank God I live in California where we take care of our own.

[nbsmom]

15. Damn straight.

SB 810 and a supermajority means we can take it to the next level, too.

[roamer65]

19. CA should take the money and set up statewide single payor.

I bet OR and WA would join in with you. Call it Pacificare.

[aggiesal]

23. We'll get flooded ...

right-wingers from red states that give them coupons or maybe groupons!

[tinrobot]

33. Red Staters can't afford to move here.

California's "border wall" is called real estate prices.

[aggiesal]

36. They'll come here on vacation and get sick ...

or have their anchor baby in California, so they could qualify,
then move back home once their treatment is finished.

[lapfog_1]

3. Will Blue States get federal funding

or get to withhold sending in federal tax dollars so that they can pay for ACA or (better) Medicare for all?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

4. They would get the same funding as they did under the ACA.

Great for blue staters, sucks for deplorable red staters.

[GoCubsGo]

5. Well, a lot of us red state dwellers techinically don't have it, anyway.

Last edited Thu Jan 19, 2017, 09:30 AM - Edit history (1)

At least not the subsidized exchanges, thanks to the sorry excuses for human beings that are our governors and state legislatures. I can't afford the $850/month that is the cheapest plan available to me in my shithole of a state. And, being single, with no kids, I am not eligible for Medicaid, and being too young for Medicare, I go without.

I hope Susan Collins and Bill Cassidy find themselves in my shoes soon. Fucking fuckers.

[CreekDog]

13. That's wrong. The cheapest plan for a single person is not $1500/month.

I agree with you about the Republicans, but that number is factually wrong.

[GoCubsGo]

26. Regardless, it's still far more than I can afford. n/t

[CreekDog]

29. Regardless? You post a false number and you say "regardless"?

why are you throwing out false numbers when we're talking about the Affordable Care Act?

[GoCubsGo]

34. I changed it. Are you happy now?

Jeez. The whole fucking point is that my republican governor refused to help me or anyone else in her state, and that health insurance is still bloody expensive because we were not allowed to be on the exchange. Be glad you have what you have--for now, anyway. A lot of us still are uncovered, and are probably going to die earlier than we would, had we not lost our jobs and health insurance at an age where most businesses are not interested in hiring us. I'm fucked. Be glad you aren't me. Go wag your finger at someone else. Good day.

[Hortensis]

21. GoCubs, you have automatic unlimited lifetime coverage

under the ACA. No annual limits, no lifetime limits, no denials due to preexisting problems or any other reasons, no gaps between policies leading to no coverage at all. That's HUGE!!! And it'll be a huge loss to red state residents if they lose it.

Btw, when's the last time you read about a surgeon taking off the wrong leg or some such thing? The ACA rigorously increased standards of care also. Requiring surgical teams to all agree to correct patient, correct site, correct procedure, etc., is only one of many ways we are all better taken care of. And those standards are at stake as well.

[GoCubsGo]

25. I have no health insurance, so the limits, etc. are meaningless.

Yes. I have annual limits. That would be whatever I can get for my house, which I would be forced to sell if I ever got sick. Unless I just drop dead first.

[Hortensis]

35. Should have said "the ACA provides." These great

blessings are very far from meaningless--even for those who don't have them right now. Coverage is one state house vote away for you at this point, possibly the better part of a generation away if it all has to be rebuilt some day.

Perhaps you can redirect some of your well-deserved anger to explaining to those around you what they have so that they can respond properly when their leaders try to take it away. Unbelievable, but most people really don't know. Fox doesn't hit those points.

In fact, just the other morning in passing through I heard a former-Fox/now-CNN anchor lie flat out to viewers, telling them that "bare-bones coverage" under a Republican plan would mean that older people wouldn't have to pay for young women to have babies. Appealing to boundless ignorance, as in "They're cheating me. Why should I have to pay for maternity care I don't need?"

[cilla4progress]

28. Regrets

[napi21]

6. Don't spend too much time trying to assess what she said. That was Susan Collins, and most of the

Pubs consider her a traitor because she sometimes votes with the Dems.

[Freethinker65]

7. So do those making over 250K get their large tax cut with the partial ACA repeal plan??

[cilla4progress]

8. Glad I'm from a NORTHERN

blue state.

[Baitball Blogger]

9. I can just imagine who gets insured and who doesn't in a Red state.

[Hortensis]

22. Umhm. And most of the highest-profit hospitals are in poorer

red southern states (or "poorer" as in at least states where more people are poor because most wealth is distributed upward). Just thought I'd throw that in.

[tritsofme]

10. The results of this experiment could make "blue states" of these "red states," in rather short order

[Freethinker65]

11. Not if they give the tax cuts and take away all or part of the subsidies.

They want to sell lesser plans across state lines for less money (looks like it saves the consumer money up front, but ultimately provides less care with higher deductibles and caps, etc.) and let states decide how to spend any federal money with block grants. Not everyone will be able to figure out the best plan. They will do their best to confuse, and that recently worked...thus PE Trump. Will be interesting to see what GOP lead states that expanded Medicare for their citizens will do if this latest volley comes to a vote and gets passed into law.

[Azathoth]

31. Refundable tax credits and subsidies are essentially the same thing

Assuming the tax credits are calculated according to the same formulae as the subsidies. It's just that one is "Real American(TM) conservative" because it's fiscally irresponsible and cuts taxes for rich people while the other is "socialism" because it only hands money to people who need it.

I've always gotten a kick out of the push to sell plans across state lines. Aside from the practical problems it would face (effective health insurance needs to be custom tailored to regional variables like demographics and doctor networks, causing a huge issue for out-of-state companies), it would create a nationwide federal insurance market... which would be regulated by the federal government. So much for the "states' rights" party I'm sure the GOP is fine with the idea now because the magic of the free market would allow insurance carriers to bring the wonders of Mississippi's insurance market to the rest of the country, but in 2020 when a Democratic president and a Democratic congress start passing real regulation, it would mean a national healthcare exchange. And it would also make a nation-wide public option that much easier.

[Freethinker65]

32. Agree with you but I was referring to the tax cuts that those making over 250k/year

would get if the ACA was repealed. Those taxes currently generated help pay for the subsidies. The GOP top earners hate this part of the ACA the most (most high earners do not care that much about contraceptive coverage). Totally agree that it would currently be a logistical nightmare for an insurance provider in, say, Alabama, to insure a citizen in, say, rural Wisconsin. Setting up in-network hospitals, labs, physicians, etc. under managed care plans in multiple states, including both urban, and sparsely poplulated areas, is not something insurance companies want to do. Some states are already allowed to try this in the current ACA. It does not work.

[global1]

12. Come On - We're Dealing With The Repugs Here.....

Sure they'll let the Blue States keep ACA but they'll choke it off so much that it will fail. Then they'll come back and say - see we told you Obamacare was a disaster.

[BigDemVoter]

14. Yes, indeed.

I will NEVER live in a red state again. Never. California is my home now!

[lou ky dem]

16. This will not work

They have already voted to cut the taxes that pay for the subsidies. There has to be a larger group of younger well people buying insurance to cover the people with pre-existing coditions.

[roamer65]

20. Correct. How to do it is how OHIP does it in Ontario, Canada.

Each business pays in a percent of payroll into OHIP. It is a fixed cost that the business can plan on each year, unlike our skyrocketing premiums. That way everyone pays in to the system...period.

[SaschaHM]

17. Sounds like a trap meant to minimize the blowback.

They get to please their constituents in solid red states, while Democrats are left holding the ball on a weakened Obamacare in blue/purple states where it would have cost republicans seats and elections.

[roamer65]

18. I am planning on them fucking it up royally.

I fully expect my out of pocket and employee contribution to skyrocket in the next couple of years. Hospitals are going to offload the costs of dealing with those without insurance, by socking it to those with insurance.

[Motown_Johnny]

24. I thought this might happen.

By making it the State's decision they are able to claim they repealed it and then blame the States that go a different route for the decline in health care.

For the (R)s in Congress, it is the best of both worlds. They get to break it and still not buy it.

[WhiteTara]

27. AR gov wants a block grant

of course, block grants can be used for anything, not just the intended purpose.

[Azathoth]

30. That's really the best we can hope for

When you're in a shipwreck, you eventually have to realize you can't save the violently insane shipmate who kicks and screams and bites as you try to pull him to the lifeboat. Either you let go of him, or you both drown.

I feel bad for the minority of sane people in the deep red states, but I'd rather tell them they can move to a blue state to get healthcare instead of joining them in the pits of despair.

[cbdo2007]

37. Then if they allow you to shop across states...everyone could still get ACA.

Sounds like something they would do...repeal it, come up with a new plan nobody uses, because they go back to the original plan, but they take credit for "opening the market".