Congress Can Function When It Chooses To: Don't Worry about Obamacare
Don't you worry about Obamacare being repealed. After six years of miserable performance including the most optimistic version of enrollment from the government which this year is still merely 9.4 to 11.1 million on exchanges out of the "47 million uninsured", after the reduction in choice of plan, after the increase in costs of plans, after the narrow networks, the rising out-of-pocket expenses, the family glitch, you might be tempted to buy-in that it's Congress' fault, hostility towards one another, whatever media-spun "reason" that Obamacare is getting worse, but you'd be missing the point.
Congress and our government LIKE Obamacare and yes, that would be BOTH parties. After all, in the last few days we've seen that Congress CAN act when it has an interest in doing so.
If you look at the Wall Street Journal, you'll notice what Congress WAS able to act in favor of itself this week, agreeing to government funding: (Kristina Peterson and Siobhan Hughes, "Congress Passes Spending Bill to Keep Government Running Through Dec. 9," http://www.wsj.com/articles/congress-nears-deal-on-spending-bill-1475070408, Sept. 28, 2016.
And Congress was also able to override, actually OVERRIDE the President, including his own Democratic packed Senate in allowing 9/11 families to sue Saudi Arabia, http://money.cnn.com/2016/09/28/news/override-obama-veto-911-bill/, with the President whining (to Jake Tapper) that going against his veto was a "political vote." Obama criticizing a "political vote"? Sure, it's political when it goes against him and it's "the right thing to do," when he takes politically motivated action.
The problem with Obamacare is that it began as and IS politically motivated and the public employees, government folk have NO reason to repeal it, only to make it worse for citizens in order to perpetuate it.
The reasons are different for the two sides, Democrats like the Obama legacy angle which ignores the reality of this brainless effort of legislation that pits the Obamacare government partnership with the insurance company lobby in a joint effort to destroy the middle class all in the pseudo name of "reform," much as in the pseudo world of "affordable" that the legislation gave us.
For Republicans, the legislation doesn't go far enough--they want more increases to our out of pocket expenses, they want further reductions in coverage by government-payer programs (as always excluding veterans which is an entitlement program as well), they want to remove any national guidelines for insurance companies.
No longer need we wonder about what's been impossible to accomplish in the six years since Obamacare, and instead must rally around what MUST be done to modify this miserable legislation.
First, the government can't merely decide not to count how much it spends on itself in Obamacare, ignoring what it spends in salaries, technology, infrastructure to support this legislation while congratulating itself on slashing benefits that save government money on how much it pays out for individuals. This kind of reasoning is corruption, the same reasoning that causes exploitation in the foster care program where individuals take money designed to be spent on children and pocket a share of it by scrimping on spending what they should for the children who are supposed to benefit from the program.
We should not CARE how much the government is "saving" on what it spends on patients, we should care what it's spending on itself of the money allotted. This means the Congressional Budget Office's excuse that they can't calculate those expenses doesn't fly: It's math, this is what's allotted, this is what you're spending per patient, this is how many patients there are and the rest you'd better explain. “…[e]stimates address only the insurance coverage provisions of the ACA and do not reflect all of the act’s budgetary effects…", (“Updated Estimates of the Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act,” http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/49892-breakout-AppendixB.pdf, page 1.)
In Obama's own words: Government, "sometimes you have to do what's hard." http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/28/politics/obama-override-veto-911-bill-cnn-presidential-town-hall/index.html.
Second, SKIN IN THE GAME MUST APPLY TO FEDERAL EMPLOYEES. WE the taxpayer are paying for up to 72 percent of the benefits paid to public employees. That loophole that argues that the federal government is the employer and as the employer public employees get what's offered by their employer in benefits which happens to be far superior to everyone else." Skin in the game MUST apply to public employees. It's a disgrace that the public employment website BRAGS:
“…studies conducted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics reveal that the gap concerning benefits between the private and public sectors has been growing-in favor of the public sector,” http://gogovernment.org/government_101/benefits.php.
In Obama's own words: "When times are tough, you tighten your belts," (https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-town-hall-meeting-nashua-new-hampshire).
Discriminatory provisions of Obamacare regarding WHO CAN BE Charged higher premiums must be changed to either allow insurers to charge anyone who's a cost center more based on their behavior or condition or to require that no one is charged more in premiums.
We've been told repeatedly that the individual mandate was necessary to get individuals with pre-existing conditions not to be denied health insurance. BUT we weren't told that the government would go one step further and prohibit higher premium charges based on the higher costs for individuals with pre-existing conditions which was going to be paid for by discriminating, singling out only two groups who can be charged more under Obamacare (based on the same standard of increased costs to insurers).
This age discrimination should NEVER have been permitted under Obamacare, nor should a policy of charging tobacco users more in premiums but ignoring other arguably "choice" expenses such as alcoholism, obesity, pregnancy, the abuse of prescription or non-prescription drugs, and other cost centers used by insurance companies to charge some people more and not others.
Fourth, the discriminatory provisions of Obamacare haven't worked: In addition to resulting in discrimination and picking and choosing who should be charged more in premiums, Obamacare's strategy didn't work, and insurance companies have been aggressively pursuing mandatory "wellness" checks that they use to calculate the prices for the policies they offer. This is merely a back-door way of charging more by insurance companies.
Fifth, remove double-dipping provisions of Obamacare that charge people TWICE: Part of Obamacare is the "free" stuff for kids that is part of the pricing for ALL health plans, https://www.healthcare.gov/preventive-care-children/, yet in order to enable your child to USE that coverage you have to PURCHASE dependent health insurance. This is a double-charge, you pay for it as part of your health insurance coverage, whether or not you have children and for children to use it you have to purchase health insurance for them.
Sixth, remove GENDER DISCRIMINATION from Obamacare: While women's rights are important, they should not be "granted" by the federal government at the expense of male's rights. The single pool theory fails in every instance where one group is singled out for superior or inferior treatment. The single pool is everyone pays for everyone. Not so when it comes to the free stuff for women we pay for but not for men. Women can be sterilized for free, not men. Women who experience domestic violence can be treated for free but not men. Women can get annual checkups for free, not men. Provide it to all or get rid of it for all.
For today, we'll stop with SEVENTH, with a last recommendation that INCREASES in out of pocket expenses should be based on the same numbers the government uses to "grant" social security cost of living increases. This benefits season you'll need to pay $7,150 for individuals and $14,300 for a family to reach your out-of-pocket maximum. It's gone up EVERY YEAR, yet somehow three times during the course of Obama's presidency social security for seniors has gone up 0. Whatever the government is making up to justify 0 payment increases for older Americans should also limit increases we can be charged in how much we must pay before reaching out-of-pocket maximums on our health insurance.
A government that only works for itself is corrupt and solutions should focus on that corruption. Obamacare provides great opportunity to begin focusing on our government corruption FIRST, not after squeezing the American people.
Congress and our government LIKE Obamacare and yes, that would be BOTH parties. After all, in the last few days we've seen that Congress CAN act when it has an interest in doing so.
If you look at the Wall Street Journal, you'll notice what Congress WAS able to act in favor of itself this week, agreeing to government funding: (Kristina Peterson and Siobhan Hughes, "Congress Passes Spending Bill to Keep Government Running Through Dec. 9," http://www.wsj.com/articles/congress-nears-deal-on-spending-bill-1475070408, Sept. 28, 2016.
And Congress was also able to override, actually OVERRIDE the President, including his own Democratic packed Senate in allowing 9/11 families to sue Saudi Arabia, http://money.cnn.com/2016/09/28/news/override-obama-veto-911-bill/, with the President whining (to Jake Tapper) that going against his veto was a "political vote." Obama criticizing a "political vote"? Sure, it's political when it goes against him and it's "the right thing to do," when he takes politically motivated action.
The problem with Obamacare is that it began as and IS politically motivated and the public employees, government folk have NO reason to repeal it, only to make it worse for citizens in order to perpetuate it.
The reasons are different for the two sides, Democrats like the Obama legacy angle which ignores the reality of this brainless effort of legislation that pits the Obamacare government partnership with the insurance company lobby in a joint effort to destroy the middle class all in the pseudo name of "reform," much as in the pseudo world of "affordable" that the legislation gave us.
For Republicans, the legislation doesn't go far enough--they want more increases to our out of pocket expenses, they want further reductions in coverage by government-payer programs (as always excluding veterans which is an entitlement program as well), they want to remove any national guidelines for insurance companies.
No longer need we wonder about what's been impossible to accomplish in the six years since Obamacare, and instead must rally around what MUST be done to modify this miserable legislation.
First, the government can't merely decide not to count how much it spends on itself in Obamacare, ignoring what it spends in salaries, technology, infrastructure to support this legislation while congratulating itself on slashing benefits that save government money on how much it pays out for individuals. This kind of reasoning is corruption, the same reasoning that causes exploitation in the foster care program where individuals take money designed to be spent on children and pocket a share of it by scrimping on spending what they should for the children who are supposed to benefit from the program.
We should not CARE how much the government is "saving" on what it spends on patients, we should care what it's spending on itself of the money allotted. This means the Congressional Budget Office's excuse that they can't calculate those expenses doesn't fly: It's math, this is what's allotted, this is what you're spending per patient, this is how many patients there are and the rest you'd better explain. “…[e]stimates address only the insurance coverage provisions of the ACA and do not reflect all of the act’s budgetary effects…", (“Updated Estimates of the Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act,” http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/49892-breakout-AppendixB.pdf, page 1.)
In Obama's own words: Government, "sometimes you have to do what's hard." http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/28/politics/obama-override-veto-911-bill-cnn-presidential-town-hall/index.html.
Second, SKIN IN THE GAME MUST APPLY TO FEDERAL EMPLOYEES. WE the taxpayer are paying for up to 72 percent of the benefits paid to public employees. That loophole that argues that the federal government is the employer and as the employer public employees get what's offered by their employer in benefits which happens to be far superior to everyone else." Skin in the game MUST apply to public employees. It's a disgrace that the public employment website BRAGS:
“…studies conducted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics reveal that the gap concerning benefits between the private and public sectors has been growing-in favor of the public sector,” http://gogovernment.org/government_101/benefits.php.
In Obama's own words: "When times are tough, you tighten your belts," (https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-town-hall-meeting-nashua-new-hampshire).
Discriminatory provisions of Obamacare regarding WHO CAN BE Charged higher premiums must be changed to either allow insurers to charge anyone who's a cost center more based on their behavior or condition or to require that no one is charged more in premiums.
We've been told repeatedly that the individual mandate was necessary to get individuals with pre-existing conditions not to be denied health insurance. BUT we weren't told that the government would go one step further and prohibit higher premium charges based on the higher costs for individuals with pre-existing conditions which was going to be paid for by discriminating, singling out only two groups who can be charged more under Obamacare (based on the same standard of increased costs to insurers).
This age discrimination should NEVER have been permitted under Obamacare, nor should a policy of charging tobacco users more in premiums but ignoring other arguably "choice" expenses such as alcoholism, obesity, pregnancy, the abuse of prescription or non-prescription drugs, and other cost centers used by insurance companies to charge some people more and not others.
Fourth, the discriminatory provisions of Obamacare haven't worked: In addition to resulting in discrimination and picking and choosing who should be charged more in premiums, Obamacare's strategy didn't work, and insurance companies have been aggressively pursuing mandatory "wellness" checks that they use to calculate the prices for the policies they offer. This is merely a back-door way of charging more by insurance companies.
Fifth, remove double-dipping provisions of Obamacare that charge people TWICE: Part of Obamacare is the "free" stuff for kids that is part of the pricing for ALL health plans, https://www.healthcare.gov/preventive-care-children/, yet in order to enable your child to USE that coverage you have to PURCHASE dependent health insurance. This is a double-charge, you pay for it as part of your health insurance coverage, whether or not you have children and for children to use it you have to purchase health insurance for them.
Sixth, remove GENDER DISCRIMINATION from Obamacare: While women's rights are important, they should not be "granted" by the federal government at the expense of male's rights. The single pool theory fails in every instance where one group is singled out for superior or inferior treatment. The single pool is everyone pays for everyone. Not so when it comes to the free stuff for women we pay for but not for men. Women can be sterilized for free, not men. Women who experience domestic violence can be treated for free but not men. Women can get annual checkups for free, not men. Provide it to all or get rid of it for all.
For today, we'll stop with SEVENTH, with a last recommendation that INCREASES in out of pocket expenses should be based on the same numbers the government uses to "grant" social security cost of living increases. This benefits season you'll need to pay $7,150 for individuals and $14,300 for a family to reach your out-of-pocket maximum. It's gone up EVERY YEAR, yet somehow three times during the course of Obama's presidency social security for seniors has gone up 0. Whatever the government is making up to justify 0 payment increases for older Americans should also limit increases we can be charged in how much we must pay before reaching out-of-pocket maximums on our health insurance.
A government that only works for itself is corrupt and solutions should focus on that corruption. Obamacare provides great opportunity to begin focusing on our government corruption FIRST, not after squeezing the American people.
0 Response to "Congress Can Function When It Chooses To: Don't Worry about Obamacare "
Posting Komentar