ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma

[David Horn]

(07-28-2017, 04:45 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(07-28-2017, 12:56 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: What puzzled me is why 9 senators voted down the repeal and replace bill, and then only 2 of them (plus McCain who had voted FOR the repeal and replace bill) voted against the skinny repeal bill in hopes of something better emerging out of a conference with the House. But what could have emerged except another bill like they had already voted down? Especially since the House bill was much worse.

Only 3 of the 49 voted for "skinny repeal" because they hoped something better would emerge.  Probably most to all of the other 46 actually preferred "skinny repeal" to any of the alternatives offered.

I mean, seriously:

- Medicaid expansion untouched, which gave the moderate Republicans everything they could hope for.
- The individual mandate, hated by all, repealed.
- The employer mandate, which prevents creation of full time entry level jobs, repealed.

The exchanges are already in a death spiral; tanking them a little faster or a little slower won't make much difference.

I heard Jeff Flake saying much the same on Morning Joe this morning.  The only problem: it's totally unworkable.  Once mandates are removed, the healthy young avoid insurance, or buy something so thin that it's of little value.  Those needing insurance then see their insurance costs go through the roof, because the heath care system, as opposed to the insurance market, still eats 18% of GDP.  The money doesn't just rain down from heaven.

FWIW, no one likes the mandates, but they are what makes the system work -- even as poorly as it currently does.  If it's OK with you that the not-quite-elderly are left to die so the young can have shit jobs, then I guess it works at that level.