A plurality of Americans want the Affordable Care Act repealed and replaced. The Republican Study Committee has worked on a replacement and come up with a proposal that has the support of a majority of House Republicans.


The plan combines all the old GOP ideas for health care in one package. Its major features are as follows. Specifically, H.R. 3121, the RSC's American Health Care Reform Act:

  • Fully repeals President Obama's health care law, eliminating billions in taxes and thousands of pages of unworkable regulations and mandates that are driving up health care costs. 
  • Spurs competition to lower health care costs by allowing Americans to purchase health insurance across state lines and enabling small businesses to pool together and get the same buying power as large corporations.
  • Reforms medical malpractice laws in a commonsense way that limits trial lawyer fees and non-economic damages while maintaining strong protections for patients.
  • Provides tax reform that allows families and individuals to deduct health care costs, just like companies, leveling the playing field and providing all Americans with a standard deduction for health insurance.
  • Expands access to Health Savings Accounts (HSAs), increasing the amount of pre-tax dollars individuals can deposit into portable savings accounts to be used for health care expenses.
  • Safeguards individuals with pre-existing conditions from being discriminated against purchasing health insurance by bolstering state-based high risk pools and extending HIPAA guaranteed availability protections.
  • Protects the unborn by ensuring no federal funding of abortions.

As might be expected, the emphasis here is on tax cuts in the form of actual deductions and in the form of Health Savings Accounts, which favor the rich. Smaller insurance companies in some states will be wiped out as the large insurance companies are allowed to come in. People with pre-existing conditions will be placed in high risk pools, guaranteeing them insurance coverage, but at much higher costs. Meanwhile all this competition will reduce costs in a business that is labor intensive and technologically sophisticated. Who wouldn't want their quadruple bypass performed by the surgeon who offers the lowest rates?

Views: 262

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Exactly Dr. Allan!  Don't they wonder why "god" let there be zygotes that never implant?

You didn't have, Mindy. You had a simple miscarriage. These theist JO's believe that if the sperm met the egg you have an instant baby. How rediculous! If they really believe it why not get a coffin and retreive the matter and play "heavenly games" with it? Then everyone can cry coz the blood, sperm, and other matter "went to heaven."
I'm sick of it too.

Mandating that anyone buy full health insurance is a violation of people's right to lead their own lives without too much government interference.  Full health insurance has too much of an impact on people's personal lives to be dictated by the government. 

So I am in sympathy with the Republican position in that regard. 

I could understand it if there were a mandate to have catastrophic health insurance or - for really rich people - to be self-insured.  People need to have enough insurance provided for them somehow, that they won't be ruined by a car accident.  And enough that they don't need to use emergency rooms for routine care, and they can get decent care even if otherwise poor.

But Obamacare goes way beyond that. 

However, prohibiting insurance co's from discriminating on the basis of pre-existing conditions does seem like a good idea. 

So, like Republicans, you glossed over the part of the constitution where Congress is supposed to promote the general welfare.

Susan, I SO agree with you.

Excellent Susan.

People need to have enough insurance provided for them somehow, that they won't be ruined by a car accident.  And enough that they don't need to use emergency rooms for routine care, and they can get decent care even if otherwise poor.

This is precisely what the Affordable Care Act aims at doing. How can you have this without a mandate on everyone for coverage?

Since the law mandates that emergency rooms must treat patients to the point of stabilization, those without health insurance impose a burden on the the rest of us. They are a significant factor in the cost increases. Catastrophic health insurance does not cover all conditions taking people to the emergency room for treatment.

The insurance companies would not have accepted the conditions of the Affordable Care Act unless they got a lot of new patients. The mandate was necessary to offset for them the costs of coverage for pre-existing conditions.

Luara, what's the difference between mandating health insurance and mandating auto insurance? Or, mandating that a person have a license to drive a car or fly a plane.
Or, in fact, any number of things that citizens must do in order to comply with the endless laws that are in place to safeguard our society?


Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today



Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon


Nexus on Social Media:

© 2015   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service