How The Senate Health Care Bill Could Disrupt The Insurance Market

Maj William W. 'Bill' Price - PO# James post was purely a partisan attack, including the usually "cute" mangling of terms. It was also simply full of lies.

<sigh>
I'll stipulate your first point, LTC Kevin B.. Sitting Republicans have decided they like the centralized control that ACA provides them. So they don't intend to change it much. To your second point, aren't all bills political bills? I don't believe that health care is a right, and I don't believe the progressive tripe that all Republicans are interested in are tax cuts for the wealthy and Democrats are the champions of the little guy. The ACA Medicaid expansion is only a means to get the States hooked on monetary opiates in order to further your first point (which we've already agreed on). Lastly, I didn't ask about the individual mandates. Do you truly believe that fewer of our younger citizens will purchase health insurance than they do now? I don't...mandate or no mandate. Where does that leave us? I believe the ACA was passed originally to usher in such chaos as to make a majority beg for single payer. That plan is working. If the article is correct, then the Republican bill will at best not improve the situation. So it looks like you've bought me around to your point of view, although for a different set of reasons than yours. My apologies for the original objection.

1stSgt Nelson Kerr - I disagree. But back to the article...the Republican bill will at best not fix the disruptions already in place via ACA. Looking at it that way, it will continue the successful disruptions already accomplished and further pave the way for single payer.

Maj William W. 'Bill' Price - I don't believe all bills are political bills. Only a true skeptic of politicians would believe that (although I'm very close to having that point of view). I actually do think fewer young people will purchase policies once the mandate goes away. Will it be one less? A million less? Who knows? But at some point, that number becomes material. I think the number will be material, while you don't. Fair enough. Additionally, what is more likely to happen on a larger scale will be that many young people will stop paying the penalty (which means less revenue). The net effect is the same, because the penalties help pay for the subsidies that enable the insurance markets to have some stability. I don't believe the conspiracy theories on "getting people hooked on goodies" or "trying to push us to a single payer". We'll disagree there too.