Support NeoGAF

[Bsigg12]

You best lay in the fucking bed you made, Republicans.

We tried to tell you this would happen but no, her emails were all that mattered.

 

[Head of Vengarl]

The GOP's war on Planned Parenthood is so fucking evil.

 

[pa22word]

I don't really think the 30% charge is that bad of an idea on its face. it seems like they're implementing it in the face of one of Aca's problems in people getting on coverage as soon as they're sick then bouncing off when they're healthy to avoid paying insurance premiums, which drove costs up for everyone. It's really the only way they can keep preexisting conditions gone while trying to stymie costs inflating into oblivion. Problem is I just don't think it's going to work. Without a hefty grace period to let people not on insurance ATM bounce into a plan it's going to be super rough on people, and even if they do have it costs will continue going up in the interim so you're hit with a chicken and egg scenario.

 

[Black Mamba]

Here are some key features:

Changing who gets financial assistance, and how much. People who buy private coverage would be eligible fixed tax credits that vary only by age, starting at $2,000 a year for people who are younger than 30, and peaking at $4,000 a year for people who are older than 60 ― with tax credits cutting out altogether at high incomes. This would replace the Affordable Care Act’s tax credits, which are bigger for people with lower incomes and higher insurance costs. It would be a net transfer of federal resources from the old and the less affluent to the young and the more affluent ― and it’s a big reason that, according to several studies, such a scheme would lead to millions of newly uninsured.

If you're old and poor, enjoy your medical debt!

Ending the individual mandate. The individual mandate would expire immediately. Insurers depend on the mandate to make sure healthy people don’t wait until getting sick before buying coverage. So, going forward, insurers could charge higher premiums to people who did not maintain “continuous coverage,” meaning that they had let it lapse for more than 63 days. It’s not clear that insurers would consider this adequate to protect against massive losses ― and that could mean a rapid destabilization of insurance markets, which in many states are already fragile, and a quick spike in the number of people without coverage.

Death Spiral, here we come!

Ending the Medicaid expansion. Federal funding for expanded Medicaid eligibility would end by 2020. States that expanded Medicaid would be free to continue offering it at that point, but they’d have to come up with the extra money with fewer federal funds. That would be a high hurdle for states. The Affordable Care Act provides federal dollars for at least 90 percent of the costs incurred by people enrolled in expanded Medicaid. The GOP bill would eliminate those extra dollars and offer states only the 50 percent to 75 percent funding available for other Medicaid beneficiaries.

Lost your job in 2021? Too bad, no insurance for you.

Radically transforming Medicaid. Funding for the entire Medicaid program, including for people who were on the program before the health care law took effect, would change dramatically. Today, the federal government offers an open-ended guarantee: It promises to provide states with however much money it takes to guarantee comprehensive benefits for anybody who becomes available. Under the new legislation, states would get a lump sum per person, based on a pre-determined formula. Critics have warned that formula would not keep up with medical costs, forcing states to make deep cuts over time.

Oh, but you're on medicaid now? Don't worry, by 2020 there won't be much money to go around. Have fun being kicked off the rolls!

End of Obamacare taxes. Taxes to finance the Affordable Care Act’s expansion, including new payroll taxes on the wealthiest Americans and taxes on the medical device industry, would expire.

Trickle Down Economics, everyone!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/house-republicans-obamacare-repeal_us_58bdf877e4b09ab537d63e57?

 

[Ziltoidia 9]

Single payer with cost control.

 

[KHarvey16]

I don't really think the 30% charge is that bad of an idea on its face. it seems like they're implementing it in the face of one of Aca's problems in people getting on coverage as soon as they're sick then bouncing off when they're healthy to avoid paying insurance premiums, which drove costs up for everyone. It's really the only way they can keep preexisting conditions gone while trying to stymie costs inflating into oblivion. Problem is I just don't think it's going to work. Without a hefty grace period to let people not on insurance ATM bounce into a plan it's going to be super rough on people, and even if they do have it costs will continue going up in the interim so you're hit with a chicken and egg scenario.

It's an awful idea on its face because it can never do what it's supposed to.

 

[RDreamer]

I don't really think the 30% charge is that bad of an idea on its face. it seems like they're implementing it in the face of one of Aca's problems in people getting on coverage as soon as they're sick then bouncing off when they're healthy to avoid paying insurance premiums, which drove costs up for everyone. It's really the only way they can keep preexisting conditions gone while trying to stymie costs inflating into oblivion. Problem is I just don't think it's going to work. Without a hefty grace period to let people not on insurance ATM bounce into a plan it's going to be super rough on people, and even if they do have it costs will continue going up in the interim so you're hit with a chicken and egg scenario.

The 30% charge incentivizes you to do just that, though. People are going to see the charge they probably can't afford and think nah I'll wait until I'm less healthy.

 

[FireAndBlood]

Not sure how this could pass the Senate. They need all Republicans plus 7 Democrats. Or they can nuke the filibuster for legislation, which they aren't crazy and desperate enough to do.

 

[Aselith]

I don't really think the 30% charge is that bad of an idea on its face. it seems like they're implementing it in the face of one of Aca's problems in people getting on coverage as soon as they're sick then bouncing off when they're healthy to avoid paying insurance premiums, which drove costs up for everyone. It's really the only way they can keep preexisting conditions gone while trying to stymie costs inflating into oblivion. Problem is I just don't think it's going to work. Without a hefty grace period to let people not on insurance ATM bounce into a plan it's going to be super rough on people, and even if they do have it costs will continue going up in the interim so you're hit with a chicken and egg scenario.

Explain how a 30% charge will help. It's still going to be less expensive to just pay the charge later than paying for insurance all the time.

 

[Netherscourge]

So it's designed to basically kick people off permanently if they are unsubscribed for 2 months.

It's literally a Healthcare Plan with a self-inflicted poison pill.

It's designed to discourage people from having Health insurance.

 

[Ziltoidia 9]

Not sure how this could pass the Senate. They need all Republicans plus 7 Democrats. Or they can nuke the filibuster for legislation, which they aren't crazy and desperate enough to do.

I believe the plan is to just use reconciliation. Even then, getting Collins and King to vote for it will be a long shot.

Tho joe manchin is becoming a Trump lover.

 

[Ponn]

yes, it is the exact same thing with a worse calculation. The only other difference is you're allowed to buy shittier insurance with it than the ACA allows

from their talking points:


oh and if you have any leftover (lol) you can put it in your hsa

I was trying to read the actual bill trying to find something on the calculations. I have a feeling by them stressing "tax credit" and not "subsidy" the help is going to be significantly worse. The subsidy I got for my ACA plan was beyond what I actually owed in taxes. I highly doubt this plan is going to end up doing that and the bulk of the subsidies will be going to the high risk pools mentioned. Which those premiums are going to skyrocket with no individual mandate so this whole thing becomes why bother. And yea the shittier cross-state plans will be their answer to the affordable part when people see their tax credits are shit. The next problem with arise when those shittier plans are the same price as the normal plans now that people are bitching about once the individual mandate is lifted and these morons suddenly realize "hey you know what, maybe these health insurance companies are just trying to make alot of money off of us and take advantage of any situation"

HSA's are the icing on the cake of how out of touch these people are with the plight of the lower class. Any extra money I may have is going to payment arrangement I made with the hospital/doctor bill to try and cover my yearly $2000 - 3000 deductible or trying to pay for monthly meds. I'm super glad the rich can use HSA's for yet another tax haven though.

 

[pa22word]

The 30% charge incentivizes you to do just that, though. People are going to see the charge they probably can't afford and think nah I'll wait until I'm less healthy.

Yeah, that's why I said I don't see it working.

To be clear, I was always skeptical of Aca's long term value from the beginning. It always felt like a step in the road towards a public option, and now without that I don't see it being viable at all long term.

 

[Saucycarpdog]

I'm confused. So they're keeping protection for people with pre existing conditions but implementing high risk pools?

So if you have a pre existing condition, you will get put in a high risk pool but the provider won't be able to deny you coverage? So doesn't that just mean your premium will go up?

 

[Black Mamba]

Not sure how this could pass the Senate. They need all Republicans plus 7 Democrats. Or they can nuke the filibuster for legislation, which they aren't crazy and desperate enough to do.

They can pass this through reconciliation with 50 votes.

They can't do a straight repeal that way, but they can amend the ACA so long as it can be shown over the next 10 years to not fuck with the deficit.

I'm confused. So they're keeping protection for people with pre existing conditions but implementing high risk pools?

So if you have a pre existing condition, you will get put in a high risk pool but the provider won't be able to deny you coverage? So doesn't that just mean your premium will go up?

Yes. it will.

 

[JP_]

Explain how a 30% charge will help. It's still going to be less expensive to just pay the charge later than paying for insurance all the time.

And now it makes even more sense to stay off while healthy because there's no penalty and you can save up that money to pay the 30% increase if you do need to. With mandate, you were paying for nothing, which was a stronger incentive to go ahead and pay for something.

 

[RDreamer]

I'm confused. So they're keeping protection for people with pre existing conditions but implementing high risk pools?

So if you have a pre existing condition, you will get put in a high risk pool but the provider won't be able to deny you coverage? So doesn't that just mean your premium will go up?

Yeah I'm confused about this. Can someone explain how pre existing conditions would work under a plan like this and what high risk pools even are.

 

[eBay Huckster]

I'm confused. So they're keeping protection for people with pre existing conditions but implementing high risk pools?

So if you have a pre existing condition, you will get put in a high risk pool but the provider won't be able to deny you coverage? So doesn't that just mean your premium will go up?

Short answer: yes, yes, and yes.

Longer answer: you'll get put in a high-risk pool that might not actually cover anything because the 9-year funding for it is what the pools actually need in one year, and you'll pay more than an otherwise healthy person for the privilege of doing so.

 

[Y2Kev]

If I'm rich and have employer insurance will my cost go down?

 

[geomon]

In the replacement bill, Medicaid becomes a voucher. This bill is radical, not conservative.

http://www.cbpp.org/medicaid-per-capita-cap-has-same-damaging-effects-as-block-grant

I can't even begin to describe how fucking infuriating this bill is.

 

[Y2Kev]

They can pass this through reconciliation with 50 votes.

They can't do a straight repeal that way, but they can amend the ACA so long as it can be shown over the next 10 years to not fuck with the deficit.



Yes. it will.

Wouldn't this need to be scored then?

 

[Netherscourge]

If I'm rich and have employer insurance will my cost go down?

That's up to your employer, I believe.

But they won't base it on your income. It'll be based on their company's general policy for all employees.

Unless I'm missing something.

 

[GaimeGuy]

Literally disincentives the uninsured from getting insurance.

GOP has no idea how to govern

 

[LegendofJoe]

Trump vows ‘insurance for everybody’ in Obamacare replacement plan



and ...

If Trump held to that promise I'd do a complete 180 on him and buy MAGA gear (he'd have to implement single-payer to do it). But lmao at that happening.

 

[Bsigg12]

I'm god awful with legalese, can someone let me know if it affects people under 26 on parents health insurance? Are they changing that?

 

[Black Mamba]

Yeah I'm confused about this. Can someone explain how pre existing conditions would work under a plan like this and what high risk pools even are.

The insurance companies cannot deny you access to their products for pre-existing conditions, still.

That part is unchanged. Premiums will be higher because less people will be buying insurance and those that are will be sicker under this plan, but that is a different issue.

A high risk pool is when you are put together with a lot of other likely sick (or definitely sick) people to socialize the costs. These are often run by the state itself. These are very expensive to be a part of. This is insurance for people who aren't insurable.

The ACA did have high risk pools prior to the marketplaces kicking in.

They failed. Because they're too fucking expensive for the user and state.

This bill allocated $15 billion per state for 2 years, then $10 billion after. Which is like 10% of what it would cost to fund this properly.

High risk won't be for someone with say, high blood pressure.

But you have prostate cancer and just lost your job? Good luck!

Wouldn't this need to be scored then?

Yes, to go through this way.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Is there any place to see the positive side of this 30% surcharge because I don't see it.

 

[Black Mamba]

I'm god awful with legalese, can someone let me know if it affects people under 26 on parents health insurance? Are they changing that?

No. If your insurance is through your parents' employer, there is almost no change.

If you are through individual marketplaces, you can still be on it, but expect premiums for everyone to rise.

Assuming these companies even offer you insurance at all.

 

[RoKKeR]

I'm god awful with legalese, can someone let me know if it affects people under 26 on parents health insurance? Are they changing that?

No. This is one of the few holdovers from the ACA.

 

[BronsonLee]

Is there any place to see the positive side of this 30% surcharge because I don't see it.

It's almost assuredly going to sink this bill!

 

[Mr.Shrugglesツ]

So basically, after the 12 month 30% increase. The following year increases will be be based on your last plan that already at 130%.

GG

 

[Foffy]

Is there any place to see the positive side of this 30% surcharge because I don't see it.

Ya just gotta think like a Republican on this one.

Get a concussion. That'd help. D:

 

[Fox Mulder]

Awful for the American people.

A lot of dumb motherfuckers wanted Obamacare gone and trusted the GOP to give them better.

 

[Bsigg12]

No. If your insurance is through your parents' employer, there is almost no change.

If you are through individual marketplaces, you can still be on it, but expect premiums for everyone to rise.

Assuming these companies even offer you insurance at all.

No. This is one of the few holdovers from the ACA.

Thanks guys. My girlfriend is still on her parents insurance and could be for another couple years so I was wondering if she would need to be looking for a new solution this year.

 

[maabus1999]

Wouldn't this need to be scored then?

Making medicaid a block grant would most likely get a positive score.

 

[geomon]

https://twitter.com/BrookingsEcon/status/838892815442673664

 

[Black Mamba]

Vox put out a good explainer:

http://www.vox.com/2017/3/6/14829526/american-health-care-act-gop-replacement

 

[Vixdean]

Did they release any of their own estimates of cost or coverage? Do they even care?

 

[junpei]

The lottery part of this is bullshit too. I'm Willing to bet that the people who win the lottery don't make up a significant portion of the super rich. From what I understand lottery winners already get taxed like 50% of whatever it is they're getting.

 

[RDreamer]

The insurance companies cannot deny you access to their products for pre-existing conditions, still.

That part is unchanged. Premiums will be higher because less people will be buying insurance and those that are will be sicker under this plan, but that is a different issue.

A high risk pool is when you are put together with a lot of other likely sick (or definitely sick) people to socialize the costs. These are often run by the state itself. These are very expensive to be a part of. This is insurance for people who aren't insurable.

The ACA did have high risk pools prior to the marketplaces kicking in.

They failed. Because they're too fucking expensive for the user and state.

This bill allocated $15 billion per state for 2 years, then $10 billion after. Which is like 10% of what it would cost to fund this properly.

High risk won't be for someone with say, high blood pressure.

But you have prostate cancer and just lost your job? Good luck!



Yes, to go through this way.

So say I had a two month gap and then got a job and got insurance I'm now paying 130%. Now if I get prostate cancer I'm shifted to a state pool instead of my employer? Do premiums then go up?

 

[teiresias]

So say I had a two month gap and then got a job and got insurance I'm now paying 130%. Now if I get prostate cancer I'm shifted to a state pool instead of my employer? Do premiums then go up?

I would think if you move into an employer group plan none of these provisions would apply. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[demon]

Republicans were the death panel this whole time.

 

[ItIsOkBro]

if you're poor you better not get sick, and if you're sick you better not be poor

 

[Black Mamba]

So say I had a two month gap and then got a job and got insurance I'm now paying 130%. Now if I get prostate cancer I'm shifted to a state pool instead of my employer? Do premiums then go up?

you don't pay a 30% premium on employer based insurance.

That is only for the individual marketplace. If you don't get it through your employer, then yes you pay 30%.

If you get prostate cancer while on your insurance, they cover it. If not, then you could be put in a high risk pool. The state can use the money for something else besides a HRP.

premiums in a HRP are enormous. Premiums will go up for the entire individual marketplace under these rules, however.

In fact, insurance numbers might drop so significantly, there might not be any providers at all in the individual market where you live.

 

[RDreamer]

I would think if you move into an employer group plan none of these provisions would apply. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong.

Oh that's right. Ok so if I get cancer and go on an insurance plan do I then get booted to a high risk pool? If I didn't lapse coverage but had employer plan and got cancer, do I get booted to a high risk pool? Those are run by the state?

 

[MetatronM]

Did they release any of their own estimates of cost or coverage? Do they even care?

You know the answer to this.

 

[subrock]

Vox put out a good explainer:

http://www.vox.com/2017/3/6/14829526/american-health-care-act-gop-replacement

On the surface, the tax credits for the oldest Americans seem the most generous. People in their 60s, for example, get twice as much help as those in their 20s.

But under the Republican plan, insurers would be allowed to charge the oldest Americans five times as much as the youngest Americans. Their financial help would not scale nearly as much as their premiums would.

Pure evil. This is why people laugh at Libertarians.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

LMAO.

GOP, ya'll funny.

 

[Y2Kev]

Making medicaid a block grant would most likely get a positive score.

Welcome new healthcare system

 

[Netherscourge]

So, what happens if an employer bails out on employee coverage?

Employees suddenly have 2 months to find their own individual plan or pay the penalty afterward?