TW: I have been pounding the table since Obama took office about folks needing to participate in solutions rather than just bitching. The Republicans have adopted an electoral strategy of nearly blind opposition. I am passionate about health care reform and in particular universal care. The Republicans have stated repeatedly that they would offer alternatives, the latest is cynical schmutz. It practically ignores universal care whilst trumpeting tired old saws about limiting medical malpractice liability and allegedly cutting costs for the "average" folk.
Their plan would cover 5% of the folks currently without care, "save" $5 billion a year in malpractive liability and maybe (assuming all of their own highly dubious projections were accurate) save the "average" folk a small fraction of the massive increases everyone faces in medical costs over the coming years. Things like mandating coverage for folks with pre-existing conditions etc. ignored.
This is a lame ploy to claim they are trying when they are most definitely not. Their entire bill amounts to about $6 billion a year. We spend that every two weeks in Iraq. This is a multi-trillion issue for those with serious intentions not hollow populist rhetoric.
From Politico:
The House Republicans health care plan only provides coverage to 3 million uninsured Americans, about 33 million less than the Democrats bill, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
"The GOP alternative, which has no chance of becoming law, would leave about 52 million Americans without coverage.
Republicans sought to lower premiums for the most Americans possible while covering far fewer uninsured Americans because they wanted to keep the costs down. They also chose not to end insurance industry practices that discriminate against the sick or the most expensive to insure in order to keep premiums low.
And it looks like they achieved that goal, according to the CBO; the Republican legislation would cost $61 billion over the next 10 years - nearly $1 trillion less than the Democrats' bill - and cut the deficit by $68 billion over its first decade.
The Republicans also save nearly $50 billion over the next decade by creating new restrictions in medical liability lawsuits.
But perhaps the most important number the GOP will are tout are those that show the plan would lower insurance premiums for many Americans. CBO estimates that the average premiums for small group plans, which includes companies with roughly fewer than 50 employees, would decrease by 7 to 10 percent by 2016. Premiums in the individual market would decline by 5 to 8 percent. While employees with bigger companies would only see a slight decrease..."
http://www.politico.com/livepulse/1109/Republicans_only_cover_3_million_uninsured.html
From Ezra Klein at WaPo:
"...CBO begins with the baseline estimate that 17 percent of legal, non-elderly residents won't have health-care insurance in 2010. In 2019, after 10 years of the Republican plan, CBO estimates that ...17 percent of legal, non-elderly residents won't have health-care insurance. The Republican alternative will have helped 3 million people secure coverage, which is barely keeping up with population growth. Compare that to the Democratic bill, which covers 36 million more people and cuts the uninsured population to 4 percent. But maybe, you say, the Republican bill does a really good job cutting costs. According to CBO, the GOP's alternative will shave $68 billion off the deficit in the next 10 years. The Democrats, CBO says, will slice $104 billion off the deficit.
The Democratic bill, in other words, covers 12 times as many people and saves $36 billion more than the Republican plan. And amazingly, the Democratic bill has already been through three committees and a merger process. It's already been shown to interest groups and advocacy organizations and industry stakeholders. It's already made its compromises with reality. It's already been through the legislative sausage grinder..."
No comments:
Post a Comment