Will republicans actually replace the ACA

If they do repeal it, no they wont replace it with anything.

But i dont think they will, i think this is simply a show and if anything they will simply alter aspects of it. Insurance companies, one of the owners of the republicans, like it.

What could they possibly replace it with that would meet both their criteria and expectations?

I don't know if they have to meet their own expectations/criteria. So long as they can have something to spin to the people. I do suppose that if democrats can say that they had 20 million people, and republicans have cut that in half that would be bad news for them maybe.

@Serraph105: Republicans don't have to answer to the people who lose their insurance, but they have to deal with the members of their base who will continue to see rising costs and who see the current market based reforms as a Socialist takeover of the system.

How do they rein in costs while also "keeping government out of healthcare?"

Doubtful, what other plan, besides single payer, that Republicans definitely won't pass, could possibly insure people and control the skyrocketing costs of healthcare?

Didn't we just have this thread?

They will replace it with something. It could take a while to hash out something enough of them can agree on to get it through congress, but there will be pressure from the public and even Trump to put some reforms in place. It is highly likely the will start allowing insurance companies to sell plans across state lines, and giving tax credits to low income people if their employer doesn't provide access to insurance. It wont do much to reign in costs, but it will help a little.

This right here is Obama's legacy. He forced this issue into the spotlight. As much as the Republican party wants to ignore the problem, they are backed into a corner and will be forced to offer up some kind of solution. And just like every problem with our health care system became Obama's fault the day the ACA passed, those problems will now be the GOP's fault the day it is repealed. They have to come up with something. They have no choice.

I think you mean a thread about the current going-ons in DC regarding the ACA, this is about predicting if republicans will even come up with a replacement. Related, but not the same.

Gotcha.

Re-posting this because of relevance.

Their best chance is to repeal, rename, and replaceme with something that is 'functionally' identical. The entire idea about the mandate is that it is a free market solution. They came up with it.

The only other option is to reduce medicare to block grants which does nothing to reduce costs, just shift the burden of paying to the poor and elderly.

Anything to benefit insurance companies, which there aren't any now because so many Americans are fat and rely on their insurance to get glucose test strips, oral pills for being too fat, and insulin.

I beg to differ.

@Gaming-Planet said:

@joebones5000 said:

Republicans don't give a shit about you and healthcare.

I beg to differ.

It would be awesome if some congressman slipped in a rider to a gigantic, near impossible to remove law or statute, that stated any private donations over 1000 usd would have to be worn, in name, on the official's clothing, that would be increeeeedible.

Obama with the Citi Bank pin on his lapel, Paul Ryan with the names of numerous oil companies, pharmaceutical reps, and lobbying firms, and Trump with well, I guess he would just wear a suit with a dollar on a fish hook and a dog on a treadmill chasing it drawn onto the back.

@Gaming-Planet said:

@joebones5000 said:

Republicans don't give a shit about you and healthcare.

I beg to differ.

"Republicans don't care about healthcare"

"Killary Clinton had corporate donors"

"THIS IS A NON-SEQUITUR!"

So here is a summary of Rand Paul's proposal for replacing the ACA. I'll let you read it, but one of the things it does away with is the rule that says you can't deny coverage to those with pre-exisiting conditions.

@mattbbpl if you have time feel free to tell me what you think, I value your insight highly on such matters.

Haha, thanks, I'm flattered.

They are free to pass it (the only ones who can stop them at this point are themselves), but I don't see how this plan as reported will meet expectations. I will give credit for publicly acknowledging that to get rid of the mandate you must get rid of the pre-existing conditions clause, but I fail to see how this will increase coverage rates. This is particularly true given that, by the author's own admission, costs are being pushed further onto consumers and moved into a "save up for when you're sick" model.

If coverage rates fall (ensuring people aren't covered) and the payment model is pushed more from an insurance model to a savings model (ensuring that some people who are covered will still be unable to pay such as those who are young and haven't been able to contribute for long or those who are poor and haven't been able to contribute much), the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act of 1986 ensures that free riders will increase and the cost burden on those paying will continue to rise even as a percentage of the cost of the system.

Sure, they could fix that by repealing the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act of 1986, but I'm pretty sure they're not ready as a party to go there yet.

@judaspete said:

@Gaming-Planet said:

@joebones5000 said:

Republicans don't give a shit about you and healthcare.

I beg to differ.

"Republicans don't care about healthcare"

"Killary Clinton had corporate donors"

Loading Video...

"THIS IS A NON-SEQUITUR!"

"Republicans don't give a shit about you."

Focuses on healthcare.

Republicans, or rather "Republicans" as we currently know them, don't give two shits about us. So no, they won't replace it. They will repeal it, and allow it to sunset over the next few years while we fight and talk about a replacement until it's too late. Then people will start dying and we will point fingers and by then the economy will probably be so bad from another Republican's mismanagement of it that we can't afford to do healthcare for the people (oh, and we will probably be at war again, too!) so...yeah.

No. They aren't interested in helping anyone get medical coverage. Just helping the big industry that is the medical field. If they wanted to help they'd have worked with Obama.

I guess it depends on how much the Republicans owe the insurance companies. Obamacare is nothing but the biggest form of corporate welfare there is.

I would be shocked if the click bait articles headlining, millions will lose their healthcare, comes true. We shall see. The orange dude said multiple times no one will lose healthcare coverage when ACA is repealed and replaced.

It's more likely for Obamacare to be repealed and replaced with Trumpcare. Different name same law. That's more likely than the apocalyptic narrative of everyone losing their healthcare.

If the Constitution wanted to give you healthcare, they would have given you healthcare.

I mean I gots the cancer but at least I have mah guns!

They've had 6 years to find and create a replacement, so no, they're not going to hash one out in the next few months. This is all a dog and pony show to look strong to their constituents.

@Gaming-Planet said:

@judaspete said:

@Gaming-Planet said:

@joebones5000 said:

Republicans don't give a shit about you and healthcare.

I beg to differ.

"Republicans don't care about healthcare"

"Killary Clinton had corporate donors"

Loading Video...

"THIS IS A NON-SEQUITUR!"

"Republicans don't give a shit about you."

Focuses on healthcare.

Okay. The picture doesn't address Republican opinions of healthcare, me, or the American people at large. So, still a non-sequitur. If you had said, "Hillary doesn't care about you either!", then posting this picture would make a little bit more sense. But all you said was, "I beg to differ", in which case you should have posted a picture of say, Paul Ryan working in a soup kitchen, or Mitch McConnell donating money to a scholarship for inner-city students. That would have kept things congruous with the previous statements.

Save this picture though for the next time some one says something like, "If only Hillary had won, then corporate lobbyists wouldn't have such a choke hold on Washington". That would make more sense.

you can shoot the cancer away

Republicans plans will be to give you the freedom to earn the money to afford healthcare by getting rid of the taxes and regulations on low income people that prevent them from being millionaires.

The democrats have already stated they will stymie and attempt at replacement. I suspect the republicans will repeal it and nothing will take its place. Bad for both parties but that is politics.

Is that sarcasm? It's quite hard to tell considering I've heard people sincerely say this before.

I think he's a Trump supporter so I doubt it's sarcasm.

Everything I've read states that Democrats plan to vote against a replacement if it falls significantly short of Obamacare's accomplishments (rate of insureds, policy protections, etc), not that they will oppose any replacement at all regardless of what it is.

Yes, it's sarcasm, and I'm aware some people actually think that and I was mocking it.

Everything I read says they will stop any attempt at a replacement - more as a political move. They want it to be a disaster. I suspect the republicans are dumb enough to oblige. They will repeal it and then replace it with nothing making it worse off.

I've reached the same conclusions as mattbbpl - as far as the stuff I've read. Democrats aren't going to vote for any replacement nor help them repeal it because they don't want to be associated with this mess. It's a good practical and political move.

This.

Neither do the Democrats. Because if they had, ACA would have gone after the healthcare providers, and not have been written hand in hand with the insurance companies as a way of getting them record profits. If you don't understand this, you're pretty fucking gullible.

@judaspete said:

@Gaming-Planet said:

@judaspete said:

@Gaming-Planet said:

I beg to differ.

"Republicans don't care about healthcare"

"Killary Clinton had corporate donors"

Loading Video...

"THIS IS A NON-SEQUITUR!"

"Republicans don't give a shit about you."

Focuses on healthcare.

Okay. The picture doesn't address Republican opinions of healthcare, me, or the American people at large. So, still a non-sequitur. If you had said, "Hillary doesn't care about you either!", then posting this picture would make a little bit more sense. But all you said was, "I beg to differ", in which case you should have posted a picture of say, Paul Ryan working in a soup kitchen, or Mitch McConnell donating money to a scholarship for inner-city students. That would have kept things congruous with the previous statements.

Save this picture though for the next time some one says something like, "If only Hillary had won, then corporate lobbyists wouldn't have such a choke hold on Washington". That would make more sense.

What's that, democrats are sellouts to Big Pharma, too?

https://theintercept.com/2017/01/12/cory-booker-joins-senate-republicans-to-kill-measure-to-import-cheaper-medicine-from-canada/

@Gaming-Planet: There you go. That reply makes sense.

The ACA has to be replaced before it collapses on itself. It is a terrible bill passed with out having been read by the people who voted to pass it.

Cry Orange tears Snowflake

allows both sides to claim "victory" for their next election campaigns.

democrats: we stopped them republicans from passing new laws on your hc which will raise prices

republicans: we kept our promise to repeal and replace the job-killing obamacare

It's ironic because it was thought up by a conservative think tank.. So go figure.

and you thought romney care would of been better

It is a terrible bill that was poorly thought out. But the past state of medical insurance in this country was a failing system as well. We need something better than Obamacare. Something that actually addresses the increasing cost of medications and care. Something that doctors/health care providers rather than washington bureacrats have a say on.

No, however it did not effect me. Obama Acre does.

I agree with you.