Pelosi to Cramer: There's no need to reinvent health care -- just improve Obamacare

[brooklynite]

Source: CNBC

Democrats should focus on making improvements to Obamacare instead of trying to reinvent the wheel with “Medicare for All,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Tuesday.

“God bless” 2020 Democratic presidential candidates putting forth Medicare for All proposals, Pelosi said in an interview with “Mad Money” host Jim Cramer. “But know what that entails.”

Pelosi’s thoughts on how to improve the nation’s health-care laws appear to align with those of former Vice President Joe Biden, who in his 2020 presidential bid is calling for building on provisions of Obamacare, formally known as the Affordable Care Act.

“I believe the path to ‘health care for all’ is a path following the lead of the Affordable Care Act,” Pelosi told Cramer. “Let’s use our energy to have health care for all Americans, and that involves over 150 million families that have it through the private sector.”

Read more: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/17/nancy-pelosi-no-need-to-reinvent-health-care-improve-obamacare.html

[dflprincess]

1. The biggest flaw in the ACA

is that it protects the private insurers.

[Silver1]

3. I completely agree.

And that's what makes it so vulnerable.

[emmaverybo]

5. On the other hand, a government program is at the mercy of government. If Republicans get in

again, they can start cutting it. Private insurance has to compete. It is not worth in any case losing the election over this.

[progree]

8. Subsidies for the ACA can be cut too. Something like 87% of those covered by the

Last edited Wed Sep 18, 2019, 12:08 AM - Edit history (1)

ACA receive premium subsidies, and they are a very big deal. And the federal government no longer funds the Cost Sharing Reductions (CSRs) for those between 100% and 250% of poverty. Nor does it fund the old risk corridors program anymore.

Other governmental acts of sabotage of the ACA including allowing junk insurance plans to undercut the ACA, cutting in half the open enrollment period, and decimating funding for the navigators that help people with ACA enrollment, and decimating outreach and advertising.

https://www.healthinsurance.org/obamacare/will-you-receive-an-obamacare-premium-subsidy/

As of mid-2018, there were nearly 10.3 million people with effectuated coverage through the exchanges nationwide. Of those, 8.9 million – or 87 percent – were receiving premium subsidies. For those enrollees, premium subsidies were covering 87 percent of the cost of coverage in 2018, bringing their after-subsidy premiums down to an average of just $76/month (as opposed to an average of $596/month before any subsidies were applied).

On edit - just to be clear, the premium subsidies mentioned in the title line and first sentence have not been cut yet, but can be by congressional action. Not likely in this Congress, fortunately.

[emmaverybo]

9. I see the ACA has been sabotaged, but don't we have at least an equal chance of resurrecting

and improving it for now as we do of implementing M4All—supporters agree it will take quite some time before implementation, if even possible. What do people do in the meantime? Surely, not give up their employer or retirement benefits provided insurance?

I think the public needs clarity on time frame and costs.

[progree]

12. Yup 😊😊😊 (eom)

[groundloop]

2. I don't really care how we get there, so long as we get there.

I can see several ways forward to 'medicare for all' using the ACA as a starting point.

For one, I believe that the subsidy for purchasing insurance in the ACA marketplace could be beefed up so that more people can get insurance at a very low cost.

Possibly include a 'public option' insurance in the marketplace. That will likely come in cheaper than the options offered by private insurance companies and will force them to keep prices in check.

On this topic I believe Speaker Pelosi is correct. I well remember the chaos during negotiations for healthcare reform, and how Joe Lieberman and a few other Democrats derailed 'medicare for all'. It would be a horrendous task to gut the ACA and start over, much better to keep improving it, IMO.

[Thekaspervote]

4. Yes, speaker Pelosi knows what she's talking about having been there during the arduous

Task of writing the law, getting the votes and seeing it pass

[PoliticAverse]

6. and Democrats lost the Senate and House as a result of how that was handled. n/t

[Magoo48]

7. Status quo, slow-walk, insurance industry bs.

At a time when strong progressive ideals will fire democratic voters, this “leadership” is weak and uninspired”. Democrats deserve fresh ideas not reheated leftovers.

[emmaverybo]

10. Will fire them. So we are told. But progressives embracing progressive policy agenda, for now anyway

are a sizeable minority, not majority of the party.

[Polybius]

11. It's $340 for me and I make under $40,000 per year

Improve it so that I pay zero per month. I don't mind higher taxes, but I'm not paying a $320 bill each month.

[KPN]

13. It's a mistake for Pelosi. to make these remarks

This will hurt her — if not the party. We m

[Vinca]

14. That's my only complaint with the candidates supporting Medicare For All. I support MFA, too,

but I think it has to be a voluntary, gradual switch via a public option in Obamacare. People don't like being told they must do something and, in this case, you're up against a big chunk of the country that will cry "socialism." They'll be the ones who will live with their shitty policies that cost too much and cover too little until they need to buy into Medicare For All. Eventually we'll get there.

[in2herbs]

15. Let's see: we have to wait on impeachment cuz the time isn't right, but we're supposed to

improve or work within a health care system whose very existence is pending an appellate decision?

What are the ACA supporters going to say/do if the appellate court rules the entire ACA unconstitutional?

[TryLogic]

16. Years ago Howard Dean (MD) had a proposal that sounded pretty simple.

Let people buy into Medicare in stages, first age group 60-64, then 55-59, etc. That would take awhile.

I say make Medicare the public option. Do something like:

Improve ACA with better subsidies for now, AND let people buy into Medicare in balanced groups in stages beginning perhaps with 25-29 & 60-64, young and old, same fee. Then 30-34 & 55-59, etc. And make sure it works for families with children. It would be most fair if person's of all ages paid the same fee. Children use lots of health care as well as older people, though not usually as serious and expensive. I don't think families who have tons of children should be subsidized by those who have small families. Family size is a choice, getting old is not. Or I suppose Catholics and Mormons could set up their own insurance plans if they feel the need to have large lots of kids. (Yes, I went there. Sorry.)

[Yavin4]

17. The problem with your plan is that only people with severe medical needs will buy

into Medicare, and their premiums won't cover the full cost of the program. This is why you need a universal system so that the premiums of people with routine needs pay for those with more severe needs.

M4A is the most efficient strategy because you cut out the middle men who need to make obscene profits for no real utility.