Republican’s VS. Democrat’s Health Care Plan

[American Horse]

( In Two Parts )

First what the Democrats are considering – It's still a work in progress; here’s what I know about it

Democrats want to expand the role of the Federal Government in the health insurance industry, and as a start they will probably tax small employers who don’t provide health insurance to their employees. Then they would use those revenues to subsidize the un-insured.

Like the Republicans they will also have to go after the $300 billion employer tax subsidy, meaning the 'equivalence-to-wages' of the presently non-taxed employer provided health insurance benefit. Max Baucus, Senate Finance Chairman himself has acknowledged the need to do that, saying, it makes him feel like Willy Sutton because he recognizes “that is where the money is.” Using some part of that recaptured tax expenditure, they would create a government subsidized health insurance plan.

Once there’s government (subsidized) insurance, the private insurance companies will disappear from the scene and we will be left with a “single payer” system, which probably everyone would agree is their real goal. Therefore they seem to be planning on doing that by vastly expanding federal regulations of health insurance and, for now, staying with the present job-related system, partly concentrating on employers to get this done.

Because many employers are too small, employing too few people, using employer provided insurance will never accomplish what needs to be done.

The Democrats are estimating costs for their plan at $1.5 trillion OR MORE over 10-years. Since their plan, unlike the Republican plan does nothing to encourage competition, that estimate will no doubt be on the low side.

 

[American Horse]

Second – What The Republicans Propose

The Republicans have a plan to provide universal coverage by channeling current subsidies for health insurance to individuals. It also provides a guarantee to access to insurance for people with pre-existing conditions. Hillary Clinton made that issue an essential principle of her own plan for universal health care during the last election, recognizing it as a pre-requisite to insuring everyone versus a direct socialized system.

The R plan mainly involves channeling the aforementioned $300 billion annual tax subsidy for employment-based-health insurance to individuals in advance in the form of refundable, tax credits, According to their plan families would get $5,700 a year and individuals $2,300 with which to buy insurance, AND TO invest in Health Savings Accounts.

Those with low-incomes would get a supplemental debit card of up to $5,000 to help them purchase insurance and pay out-of-pocket costs. This would bring sorely needed competition to the market because they would have an incentive to spend wisely; up to one-fourth of any unspent money in the accounts could be rolled over to the next year;, making them much more conscious of spending that money wisely because it would be their own. The combination of the refundable tax credit and debit card gives lower-income Americans a way out of the Medicaid system which is seen as a welfare benefit.

The Republican plan which is called the Patients Choice Act will be a better fit for the structure of the American workforce as it now exists. That is because health insurance coverage to employers is leaving out 45-million Americans. The Republican’s plan takes that into account. Recognizing that employer provided plans are actually a form of income for the employees, and taxing those benefits as income will make those plans less attractive to both employees and employers. Most Americans will see little difference, tax wise. Employers will continue to have business deductions for their expense on behalf of their employees.

The crux of the matter should be:
Will the next health-reform continue a system of job-based health insurance or allow more individual choice with the insured no longer dependent on their employer for their insurance.

While many Americans are fed up with private insurance, opinion polls consistently show a majority think government-controlled health care would be worse. There are problems in the private insurance market, and the Republican plan takes steps that can help.

Which plan will better suit Americans: The plan which will make a one payer system inevitable or the plan which encourages competition and brings choice to the health industry?

 

[Oddball]

Democrat plan: Do much much, more of what already has failed to deliver the goods and spend much, much more money doing so.

Republican plan: Try to polish democrat turds.

 

[American Horse]

Democrat plan: Do much much, more of what already has failed to deliver the goods and spend much, much more money doing so.

Republican plan: Try to polish democrat turds.

I disagree; the Republican plan stimulates competition by making a considerable part of the money spent by the insured their own money. People look out for their own money with a lot more diligence than they do someone elses money. No?

 

[007]

The government shouldn't even be dicking with this, dem or repub. If you want health insurance, go buy it. It isn't the governments job to buy it for you.

But if you believe it is, please show me where it says that in the constitution.

Just another reason why I left the republican party. They act more like the stinkin' dems every year. I'm proud to call myself an independent nowadays.

 

[Life_Long_Dem!]

I disagree that either plan will work...it wont, it will just be more of them same bullshit with a slight new polish to it. Neither plan will be true universal health care in any way shape or form, it is that simple.

 

[Seraega]

The government shouldn't even be dicking with this, dem or repub. If you want health insurance, go buy it. It isn't the governments job to buy it for you.

But if you believe it is, please show me where it says that in the constitution.

Just another reason why I left the republican party. They act more like the stinkin' dems every year. I'm proud to call myself an independent nowadays.

This would be a fair point if the state governments would get the fuck out of the way. Why does insurance in VA cost $200 a month for an entire family, and in NY it's $1000? I'll tell you......... regulation. We either need states to step off and allow for competition to bring down prices by a health insurance exchange - OR - we need real single payer. Any of this middle road bullshit is just going to result in more cost and less people covered.

 

[Life_Long_Dem!]

The government shouldn't even be dicking with this, dem or repub. If you want health insurance, go buy it. It isn't the governments job to buy it for you.

But if you believe it is, please show me where it says that in the constitution.

Just another reason why I left the republican party. They act more like the stinkin' dems every year. I'm proud to call myself an independent nowadays.

very good point on dems and repubs or as I like to call them"republicrats" they are one and the same anymore and these "differing" plans are just a smoke screen for more of the same with a bit brighter polish to it!

 

[Oddball]

I disagree; the Republican plan stimulates competition by making a considerable part of the money spent by the insured their own money. People look out for their own money with a lot more diligence than they do someone elses money. No?

True. Yet they've done zero to roll back Medicare/Medicaid, the extensive and idiotic FDA regs to get new medications and procedures approved, and indeed helped expand the gumint-run medicine model with the dippy prescription drug giveaway.

 

[Oddball]

This would be a fair point if the state governments would get the fuck out of the way. Why does insurance in VA cost $200 a month for an entire family, and in NY it's $1000? I'll tell you......... regulation. We either need states to step off and allow for competition to bring down prices by a health insurance exchange - OR - we need real single payer. Any of this middle road bullshit is just going to result in more cost and less people covered.

A lot -albeit not all- of state spending is mandated through Medicare/Medicaid requirements.

 

[midcan5]

By chance there is French woman visiting neighbors who I want to question on this topic.

"France's model healthcare system By Paul V. Dutton | August 11, 2007

MANY advocates of a universal healthcare system in the United States look to Canada for their model. While the Canadian healthcare system has much to recommend it, there's another model that has been too long neglected. That is the healthcare system in France.

Although the French system faces many challenges, the World Health Organization rated it the best in the world in 2001 because of its universal coverage, responsive healthcare providers, patient and provider freedoms, and the health and longevity of the country's population. The United States ranked 37.

The French system is also not inexpensive. At $3,500 per capita it is one of the most costly in Europe, yet that is still far less than the $6,100 per person in the United States.

An understanding of how France came to its healthcare system would be instructive in any renewed debate in the United States...."

France's model healthcare system - The Boston Globe

 

[Life_Long_Dem!]

By chance there is French woman visiting neighbors who I want to question on this topic.

"France's model healthcare system By Paul V. Dutton | August 11, 2007

MANY advocates of a universal healthcare system in the United States look to Canada for their model. While the Canadian healthcare system has much to recommend it, there's another model that has been too long neglected. That is the healthcare system in France.

Although the French system faces many challenges, the World Health Organization rated it the best in the world in 2001 because of its universal coverage, responsive healthcare providers, patient and provider freedoms, and the health and longevity of the country's population. The United States ranked 37.

The French system is also not inexpensive. At $3,500 per capita it is one of the most costly in Europe, yet that is still far less than the $6,100 per person in the United States.

An understanding of how France came to its healthcare system would be instructive in any renewed debate in the United States...."

France's model healthcare system - The Boston Globe

That is a very excellent topic for discussion. It is too bad many on this board will only try and pull the negatives out when it comes to ANY form of universal health care cause TRUE uhc is a form of socialism and GOD FORBID that it comes to this country!

 

[Oddball]

You like France's socialized medical services, move to France.

 

[Fraulein Hilda]

The French system rations healthcare. So does Canada's. So does Great Britain's.

The problem with libs is they point to these systems as gold standards, but when you corner them about rationing, they say, well, we won't have a system like... They want it both ways.

A politician who has no qualms about canning 200,000 employees of auto dealers will have no qualms about closing clinics and hospitals he does not think are necessary.

Americans can buy as much health care as they want, and it's none of the goddamned government's business how much they should have.

 

[Seraega]

You like France's socialized medical services, move to France.

You like Somalia's libertarian paradise, move to Somalia.

 

[Fraulein Hilda]

Inner cities run by Democrat mayors more closely resemble Somalia.

 

[Seraega]

The French system rations healthcare. So does Canada's. So does Great Britain's.

The problem with libs is they point to these systems as gold standards, but when you corner them about rationing, they say, well, we won't have a system like... They want it both ways.

A politician who has no qualms about canning 200,000 employees of auto dealers will have no qualms about closing clinics and hospitals he does not think are necessary.

Americans can buy as much health care as they want, and it's none of the goddamned government's business how much they should have.

Nice scare tactic. Hospitals are already being closed because of govt mandate. The govt ALREADY pays most of the bills because of medicare/medicaid.

 

[Fraulein Hilda]

The French system rations healthcare. So does Canada's. So does Great Britain's.

The problem with libs is they point to these systems as gold standards, but when you corner them about rationing, they say, well, we won't have a system like... They want it both ways.

A politician who has no qualms about canning 200,000 employees of auto dealers will have no qualms about closing clinics and hospitals he does not think are necessary.

Americans can buy as much health care as they want, and it's none of the goddamned government's business how much they should have.

Nice scare tactic. Hospitals are already being closed because of govt mandate. The govt ALREADY pays most of the bills because of medicare/medicaid.

So you're saying government will only accellerate those closings. Then it's not a scare tactic. You proved my point.

Medicare and Medicaid shift costs to private and third party payers. Government will force providers to accept lower reimbursement with no means of recovering that elsewhere.

Many will quit.

 

[Oddball]

You like Somalia's libertarian paradise, move to Somalia.

That's anarchy, asshole, not libertarian.....I could point out the numerous differences between the two, but they wouldn't penetrate a room temperature I.Q.

 

[American Horse]

The government shouldn't even be dicking with this, dem or repub. If you want health insurance, go buy it. It isn't the governments job to buy it for you.

But if you believe it is, please show me where it says that in the constitution.

Just another reason why I left the republican party. They act more like the stinkin' dems every year. I'm proud to call myself an independent nowadays.

This is a serious issue! The Ds are involved and they aren't saying as much about their plan as the Rs are. Don't count on the MSM to telll you anything.

It's going to become a single payer healthcare system or not. In my opinion, there is only one way to stop that from happening, and that is if there is a better plan than the D plan, and the only way to make that system better than the present situation - which is constantly eroding - is to make it competiive. The Rs have a plan to do that.

You may be one of those people who one way or the other operates outside the pesent system. I've always had to stay in it, and it has been a continuing eroding situation, now accelerating. Right at this moment I am payiing on two seperate policies ($900 and 200) a total of $1,100 per month. That is $13,200 per year. My deductible is $2,000 on the larger policy. I have stayed involved. I want this to get better not worse.

Those of you who are young think this is not important. Before you know it, especially if you do manual labor, you're going to need joint work so that you can keep working. You may be involuntarily "retired" if the govt system denies you the surgery you need to keep on working because it is not cost effective. Right now you can make that judgement.

You desk jockies think its going to be different for you; well, not likely.
Many of you'll become obese and get high blood pressure. Eventually you'll have a stroke...be partially paralyzed. Anything can happen. Then you'll be involved, like it or not.

Who here knows how a Medical or Health Savings account works? Thos who don't understand the principle behind them need to do some research.