Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Under this bill, pregnancy will cost you an extra 17K. Metastatic cancer 172K. Autism 5K. Asthma 4K. This isn't a healthcare bill.

The only problem I see is the $172k for cancer. Paying $5k for autism or $4k for asthma is small potatoes compared to the sky-high premiums under Obamacare. Middle-class couples easily pay more than $30,000 a year for their health needs, so $4k or $5k is nothing compared to the financial strain of Obamacare.

Agreed. I would gladly take on a little more risk for reduced payments. I am subsidizing too many treatments that I do not want or need.

Yup. Al Franken was talking today about how the GOP might get rid of the "essential" coverage, neglecting to mention how we are oaying through the nose for "essential" coverage we will never or likely never need to use.

Are you on the ACA exchange?

Yes, but I make too much for subsidies, so I'm paying over $800 a month (for one), with a deductible of $4500. That's $15,000 year for "affordable" health care. And that's what someone my age would have to pay even if they made only $49k a year. Completely unaffordable for the middle class.

That is absolutely preposterous. The other PP was right. Obamacare is a piece of shit.

If Obama didn't want his signature legislation to be repealed as soon as he left office, he should have pushed a less shitty bill.

The ACA is terrible and it's embarrassing that people pretend to like it because they don't want to insult President Obama. We need single payer medicare for all and we need Democratic politicians to know we will vote them out if they don't agree.

https://apnews.com/e57328097c154b5e9c86daa0150552b9

Winners — People who don’t believe the government should require individuals to purchase a costly private service like health insurance. The bill would repeal “Obamacare’s” unpopular requirements for individuals to have coverage and for larger employers to offer coverage. The trade-off is that without such a legal requirement, more people are likely to be uninsured. And an accident or unexpected illness can make that a costly decision.

The problem with this is that accidents happen. Cancer happens, most frequently without warning. So the more uninsured people there are, the more expensive it will be to treat them when they do need care. All of the GOP proposals remove the requirement for coverage, but that also leaves the responsibility to the individual, which would be fine if individuals were sure to purchase enough coverage for their needs. Prior to the ACA, that wasn't the case, so people were using ER for regular care and uninsured accidents created a greater financial strain on the system. The ACA helps to address that, though it still needs to be modified.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bottom line is there are fixes to the ACA which the Dems have been trying to address since 2013, but the GOP controlled Congress has refused to let any of them see the floor for a vote, instead choosing to make folks like the PP pay exhorbanent premiums in an attempt to get support for the repeal. Obviously it is working, but the better solution is to either fix and fund the ACA or go to single payer.

All of this other stuff, particularly what the GOP is trying to do is really deplorable.

What are these "fixes"? And please include how we pay for the fixes. Thanks.

Gee, there is a thing called google, why don't you read the myriad bills that have been presented over the past several years.

Anonymous wrote:The bottom line is there are fixes to the ACA which the Dems have been trying to address since 2013, but the GOP controlled Congress has refused to let any of them see the floor for a vote, instead choosing to make folks like the PP pay exhorbanent premiums in an attempt to get support for the repeal. Obviously it is working, but the better solution is to either fix and fund the ACA or go to single payer.

All of this other stuff, particularly what the GOP is trying to do is really deplorable.

What are these "fixes"? And please include how we pay for the fixes. Thanks.

Anonymous wrote:This bill is just Eugenics in a different mask.

It's certainly Darwinian. If you are not fit or have not inherited wealth to pay for your healthcare costs, tough luck for you. Die sick ones! The US Government (read GOP) will not help you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Under this bill, pregnancy will cost you an extra 17K. Metastatic cancer 172K. Autism 5K. Asthma 4K. This isn't a healthcare bill.

The only problem I see is the $172k for cancer. Paying $5k for autism or $4k for asthma is small potatoes compared to the sky-high premiums under Obamacare. Middle-class couples easily pay more than $30,000 a year for their health needs, so $4k or $5k is nothing compared to the financial strain of Obamacare.

Agreed. I would gladly take on a little more risk for reduced payments. I am subsidizing too many treatments that I do not want or need.

Yup. Al Franken was talking today about how the GOP might get rid of the "essential" coverage, neglecting to mention how we are oaying through the nose for "essential" coverage we will never or likely never need to use.

Are you on the ACA exchange?

Yes, but I make too much for subsidies, so I'm paying over $800 a month (for one), with a deductible of $4500. That's $15,000 year for "affordable" health care. And that's what someone my age would have to pay even if they made only $49k a year. Completely unaffordable for the middle class.

I have an employer sponsored plan. My share of premiums are $450 a month. My employer pays about the same. The cost of my plan has risen for the last 9 years of being with my company. That's not the ACA. That's our healthcare industry.

OK, so you have a $900 a month plan (similar to mine). I assume that's for an individual, but what is the deductible? That comes into the equation, too, since with my plan, I have to pay for everything anyway (other than the annual checkup), so it's like no insurance at all. It's more like a catastrophic plan, which would be fine, but not for $10k in premiums.

I do agree that the problem is with the health care industry itself. (I had a routine culture taken, and the lab charged me $2200. When I called to complain, they lowered it to $250.) But neither Republicans NOR Democrats will tackle the root problem because they have all been bought off by lobbyists.

PP here. $7500 in deductibles and co pays are high. When I go to my PCP I pay $55 a visit in copays - just for my regular doctor. If I have the misfortune of showing up in the ER, I'll pay $350 for that visit. Hospital stays, provided I'm admitted, I pay the first $2500 - that's a ton of money. That's my plan today. When I joined the company, my deductible was $2500 a year and copays for my PCP were $20.

That was nine years ago and every single year it's gone up. The difference is now my preexisting conditions are covered. And no lifetime maxes so at least, God forbid, I end up with a serious disease, I won't be booted out because I reached a cap.

Moreover, when you look at the "replacements" from the GOP, all of the costs go up across the board and there are a million exclusions. I have exzema and that under the GOP plans would be a preexisting condition disqualifying me for a whole host of further treatments. Sure, you can pay less for a plan, but they've structured that plan so it basically covers NOTHING. That's not a plan, that's a con. The ACA wasn't perfect, but it's at least a step in the right direction.

When you have a Congress that doesn't have to worry about insurance coverage because they get premium coverage through their jobs and/or are individually wealthy and you have heavy duty lobbying by corporations and the for-profit healthcare industry, you get what the GOP is doing. Destroying the ACA and coming up with absurd alternatives that offer middle class and working class people NOTHING.

No, no! This new plan is WORSE than offering middle class people NOTHING. IT TAKES money out of our pockets! '

Congress does not care because they already have Single-Payer! The hypocrisy of those #$%% Republicans knows no boundaries.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Under this bill, pregnancy will cost you an extra 17K. Metastatic cancer 172K. Autism 5K. Asthma 4K. This isn't a healthcare bill.

Neither is my health coverage real at the ridiculous sky higj premiums I am paying under Aca. Affordable my ass. They better do something or I'll kick them out of office. There are just as many of us who have been hurt. Y this monstrosity as you who claim that it is your saving grace. It needs a full repeal

A full repeal means no coverage for prexisting conditions or lifetime maxes. That's gonna cost you. Premiums have gone up every years for the last 30 years. This isn't the ACA it's the reality of a for-profit healthcare model. You're directing your outrage at the ACA. In fact, millions more have coverage under ACA AND the breadth and depth of coverage is better.

The "security" that comes from knowing pre-x conditions are covered is false. It's a big rallying cry of the D's, but did you realize that the ACA plans are so limited in networks that 15% of them are missing key specialists? It's a big LIE that insurers have to cover pre-x conditions, since they aren't required to have a specialist for every condition. So you could buy into an ACA plan for $10k a year, thinking you're now protected in case you develop....whatever.....a serious thyroid condition.....only to find that, when you do, your plan has no endriconoligists.

Oh please. 15% of America does not have an endocrinologist within a reasonable drive.

That was only an example. But another common specialty that is missing are psychiatrists. So.....Obamacare requires that mental health be covered, but does not require plans to have a psychiatrist? Obviously, that was another "gimme" to the insurance industry that had donated heavily to Obama & Co. (Rs are guilty of the same thing....bribed by health industry officials.)

I have an employer sponsored plan through UHC and there are barely any in-network psychiatrists and I live in close-in Maryland, not some rural town. Psychiatrists are hard to find under in-network coverage because they don't want to be bound by the measly payments they'll receive.

Needed to find a speech therapist for my son that was in network and there are only two that are in network in the 50 mile radius where we live and the waiting time for an appointment for a diagnostic was three months. Again, I live in a close-in suburb of Washington, DC and have problems finding and securing an appointment with a specialist.

This isn't the ACA, it's the structure of our healthcare industry.

This bill is just Eugenics in a different mask.

If it fails, yeah! If they manage to get it through then t-rump's base is hurt the most. Win-win, either way.

The bottom line is there are fixes to the ACA which the Dems have been trying to address since 2013, but the GOP controlled Congress has refused to let any of them see the floor for a vote, instead choosing to make folks like the PP pay exhorbanent premiums in an attempt to get support for the repeal. Obviously it is working, but the better solution is to either fix and fund the ACA or go to single payer.

All of this other stuff, particularly what the GOP is trying to do is really deplorable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Under this bill, pregnancy will cost you an extra 17K. Metastatic cancer 172K. Autism 5K. Asthma 4K. This isn't a healthcare bill.

The only problem I see is the $172k for cancer. Paying $5k for autism or $4k for asthma is small potatoes compared to the sky-high premiums under Obamacare. Middle-class couples easily pay more than $30,000 a year for their health needs, so $4k or $5k is nothing compared to the financial strain of Obamacare.

Agreed. I would gladly take on a little more risk for reduced payments. I am subsidizing too many treatments that I do not want or need.

Yup. Al Franken was talking today about how the GOP might get rid of the "essential" coverage, neglecting to mention how we are oaying through the nose for "essential" coverage we will never or likely never need to use.

Are you on the ACA exchange?

Yes, but I make too much for subsidies, so I'm paying over $800 a month (for one), with a deductible of $4500. That's $15,000 year for "affordable" health care. And that's what someone my age would have to pay even if they made only $49k a year. Completely unaffordable for the middle class.

I have an employer sponsored plan. My share of premiums are $450 a month. My employer pays about the same. The cost of my plan has risen for the last 9 years of being with my company. That's not the ACA. That's our healthcare industry.

OK, so you have a $900 a month plan (similar to mine). I assume that's for an individual, but what is the deductible? That comes into the equation, too, since with my plan, I have to pay for everything anyway (other than the annual checkup), so it's like no insurance at all. It's more like a catastrophic plan, which would be fine, but not for $10k in premiums.

I do agree that the problem is with the health care industry itself. (I had a routine culture taken, and the lab charged me $2200. When I called to complain, they lowered it to $250.) But neither Republicans NOR Democrats will tackle the root problem because they have all been bought off by lobbyists.

PP here. $7500 in deductibles and co pays are high. When I go to my PCP I pay $55 a visit in copays - just for my regular doctor. If I have the misfortune of showing up in the ER, I'll pay $350 for that visit. Hospital stays, provided I'm admitted, I pay the first $2500 - that's a ton of money. That's my plan today. When I joined the company, my deductible was $2500 a year and copays for my PCP were $20.

That was nine years ago and every single year it's gone up. The difference is now my preexisting conditions are covered. And no lifetime maxes so at least, God forbid, I end up with a serious disease, I won't be booted out because I reached a cap.

Moreover, when you look at the "replacements" from the GOP, all of the costs go up across the board and there are a million exclusions. I have exzema and that under the GOP plans would be a preexisting condition disqualifying me for a whole host of further treatments. Sure, you can pay less for a plan, but they've structured that plan so it basically covers NOTHING. That's not a plan, that's a con. The ACA wasn't perfect, but it's at least a step in the right direction.

When you have a Congress that doesn't have to worry about insurance coverage because they get premium coverage through their jobs and/or are individually wealthy and you have heavy duty lobbying by corporations and the for-profit healthcare industry, you get what the GOP is doing. Destroying the ACA and coming up with absurd alternatives that offer middle class and working class people NOTHING.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Under this bill, pregnancy will cost you an extra 17K. Metastatic cancer 172K. Autism 5K. Asthma 4K. This isn't a healthcare bill.

Neither is my health coverage real at the ridiculous sky higj premiums I am paying under Aca. Affordable my ass. They better do something or I'll kick them out of office. There are just as many of us who have been hurt. Y this monstrosity as you who claim that it is your saving grace. It needs a full repeal

A full repeal means no coverage for prexisting conditions or lifetime maxes. That's gonna cost you. Premiums have gone up every years for the last 30 years. This isn't the ACA it's the reality of a for-profit healthcare model. You're directing your outrage at the ACA. In fact, millions more have coverage under ACA AND the breadth and depth of coverage is better.

The "security" that comes from knowing pre-x conditions are covered is false. It's a big rallying cry of the D's, but did you realize that the ACA plans are so limited in networks that 15% of them are missing key specialists? It's a big LIE that insurers have to cover pre-x conditions, since they aren't required to have a specialist for every condition. So you could buy into an ACA plan for $10k a year, thinking you're now protected in case you develop....whatever.....a serious thyroid condition.....only to find that, when you do, your plan has no endriconoligists.

Oh please. 15% of America does not have an endocrinologist within a reasonable drive.

That was only an example. But another common specialty that is missing are psychiatrists. So.....Obamacare requires that mental health be covered, but does not require plans to have a psychiatrist? Obviously, that was another "gimme" to the insurance industry that had donated heavily to Obama & Co. (Rs are guilty of the same thing....bribed by health industry officials.)

And this new bill will address these issues how?

Some or many of these issues can be addressed, even without campaign finance reform. It's possible for Congress to have real, beneficial effects. If they have the will.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Under this bill, pregnancy will cost you an extra 17K. Metastatic cancer 172K. Autism 5K. Asthma 4K. This isn't a healthcare bill.

Neither is my health coverage real at the ridiculous sky higj premiums I am paying under Aca. Affordable my ass. They better do something or I'll kick them out of office. There are just as many of us who have been hurt. Y this monstrosity as you who claim that it is your saving grace. It needs a full repeal

A full repeal means no coverage for prexisting conditions or lifetime maxes. That's gonna cost you. Premiums have gone up every years for the last 30 years. This isn't the ACA it's the reality of a for-profit healthcare model. You're directing your outrage at the ACA. In fact, millions more have coverage under ACA AND the breadth and depth of coverage is better.

The "security" that comes from knowing pre-x conditions are covered is false. It's a big rallying cry of the D's, but did you realize that the ACA plans are so limited in networks that 15% of them are missing key specialists? It's a big LIE that insurers have to cover pre-x conditions, since they aren't required to have a specialist for every condition. So you could buy into an ACA plan for $10k a year, thinking you're now protected in case you develop....whatever.....a serious thyroid condition.....only to find that, when you do, your plan has no endriconoligists.

something like 80% of people over 50 take a rx medication, ie, they now have a pre-existing medical condition. At some point, the majority of Americans will have some kind of pre-existing condition.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Under this bill, pregnancy will cost you an extra 17K. Metastatic cancer 172K. Autism 5K. Asthma 4K. This isn't a healthcare bill.

The only problem I see is the $172k for cancer. Paying $5k for autism or $4k for asthma is small potatoes compared to the sky-high premiums under Obamacare. Middle-class couples easily pay more than $30,000 a year for their health needs, so $4k or $5k is nothing compared to the financial strain of Obamacare.

Agreed. I would gladly take on a little more risk for reduced payments. I am subsidizing too many treatments that I do not want or need.

Yup. Al Franken was talking today about how the GOP might get rid of the "essential" coverage, neglecting to mention how we are oaying through the nose for "essential" coverage we will never or likely never need to use.

Are you on the ACA exchange?

Yes, but I make too much for subsidies, so I'm paying over $800 a month (for one), with a deductible of $4500. That's $15,000 year for "affordable" health care. And that's what someone my age would have to pay even if they made only $49k a year. Completely unaffordable for the middle class.

I have an employer sponsored plan. My share of premiums are $450 a month. My employer pays about the same. The cost of my plan has risen for the last 9 years of being with my company. That's not the ACA. That's our healthcare industry.

OK, so you have a $900 a month plan (similar to mine). I assume that's for an individual, but what is the deductible? That comes into the equation, too, since with my plan, I have to pay for everything anyway (other than the annual checkup), so it's like no insurance at all. It's more like a catastrophic plan, which would be fine, but not for $10k in premiums.

I do agree that the problem is with the health care industry itself. (I had a routine culture taken, and the lab charged me $2200. When I called to complain, they lowered it to $250.) But neither Republicans NOR Democrats will tackle the root problem because they have all been bought off by lobbyists.

Campaign finance reform.

Which conservative leaning SCOTUS killed.