Republicans Finally Come out with a Health Care Bill Longer than your 8th Grader's Book Report

[Anonymous]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33605531/ns/politics-health_care_reform/

They must have been furiously writing nearly a page a day since the beginning of the year. Whew! Time to pull that baby out of the backpack, put it in a spiffy cover, and turn it into teacher.

[Anonymous]

Personally I prefer a proposal that I have half a chance of being able to read through and understand to having a bill twice the length of "War and Peace" put up with 72 hours to make a decision and vote.

[Anonymous]

I prefer a proposal that was put together when it would have mattered, not so they can later say they did something.

[Anonymous]

I would much rather have a piece of legislation that was 250 pages vs 1500 pages. There is a lot more to hide in the thicker volume as fewer people are going to read it. I don't think a lot of people understand that the Obama's plan will make those who make a certain dollar amount, but don't have insurance, purchase insurance. It's easier to find these hidden gems when they aren't lost in more than a thousand pages.

[jsteele]

I think bills should be judged by their content rather than their length. The Republican bill does not stop insurance companies from denying coverage to those with pre-existing conditions and does not prevent the same insurance companies from dropping customers who get sick. It does almost nothing to expand coverage. As Representative Grayson said, the plan really is "Don't get sick, but if you do, die quickly". Whether such a plan takes one page, 250 pages, or 2500 pages, it's still not a good plan.

[jsteele]

This just in, as they say. The CBO has had a chance to look at the Republican plan and things are even worse then expected. As would have been expected, the plan leaves the number of people covered by health insurance virtually unchanged. As the report puts it:

"The share of legal nonelderly residents with insurance coverage in 2019 would be about 83 percent, roughly in line with the current share."

So, no expansion of health insurance. So, don't get sick.

But, the Republicans must be trying to control costs, right? I mean, that's what Republicans always "say" they are going to do. So, yes, over 10 years, the CBO says the plan will reduce the deficit by $68 billion. So, bingo, there it is. Cost savings. Bonanza. Republicans rock! But, wait. The CBO says the House Democrats' plan will save $104 billion over the same 10 years. Moreover, the Democrats' plan expands health insurance coverage and includes the dreaded public option. So, the Democrats get more for less. That seems like a good deal.

So, the choice here is pretty simple. Do you want a plan that primarily awards the insurance companies but does nothing to expand healthcare (but is really, really short), or do you want a plan that saves more money while at the same time providing coverage to more people?

Editing to add the link to the CBO report:

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/107xx/doc10705/hr3962amendmentBoehner.pdf

[Anonymous]

I guess they left out the "cover more people" chapter. We should ask the leader of the GOP group project to find out who didn't turn in their part of the project. Also missing was the mandatory posterboard collage.

[Anonymous]

I don't like either plans to be honest. I think there needs to be reform, but neither parties are going about it in the right way. Just a bunch of idiots wasting time and money and not looking into the real solution.