Sixty-eighth Day

The Republican House (Paul Ryan) has submitted their healthcare 'replacement' proposal.

This is it.

I downloaded a copy as well.

The short comment I have is that it's clear the Republicans care less about presenting a health care plan that can work than about being able to say they repealed and replaced Obamacare.

Why?
1. They haven't even figured out how it will be paid for and they're already trying to pass it through the House.
2. Some conservative Republicans are against it because the plan maintains some key components of the ACA - namely the tax credits/subsidies which they call a new entitlement program.
3. As of this morning the AARP, the AMA, the American Nurses Association, the American Hospital Association, the Association of Medical Colleges, the Catholic Health Association of the US, and the Children's Hospital Association are against the plan.  Some of those groups I don't know anything about, but it sounds like they'd definitely have experience with health care.

Winners and Losers
If I lose my job I believe I'd be one of the losers. The reason the AARP is against it is because people from age 50 - 64 are the most adversely affected by the plan.

Why?  Under the ACA (Affordable Care Act), tax credits were calculated based on the cost of insurance in a person's area and their income.  The AHCA (American Health Care Act) only offers a flat tax credit based on a person's AGE.
As a result, an older person (50 - 64) who doesn't have medical insurance through work, lives in a high premium area, and is low income is the most adversely affected.  The tax credit will not cover the entirety of their insurance premium.
Conversely, the biggest winners are younger, high income people who live in an area with low premiums.  Their tax credit will cover more of their insurance premium.

Another trip up with this plan: Let's imagine you're insured through work.  You lose your job, which means you also lose your insurance.  You're shocked.  You give yourself a couple months to get yourself together.  During that time you don't have insurance because you're afraid you don't have enough money.  A couple months later you put your life back together and attempt to get insurance.  Because you have a couple months without insurance, you now have to pay 30% MORE for your insurance than other people in your exact situation have to pay.  Why?  Because you allowed your insurance to lapse.  You get penalized for not getting any insurance during those two months.  This is intended to 'encourage' no lapse in coverage.

Sounds like an individual mandate if you ask me.  And that's the complaint about the ACA that I heard the most.

That's it for today.


P.S.
The website that promotes the AHCA says the reason the ACA is bad is that premiums have increased by an average of 25 percent
Note:  Of the more than 90 percent of Americans who have health insurance, most get it from their job or the government. Premium growth has been LOW for those groups in the last few years.  The remainder buy it themselves either directly or through the ACA Marketplace.  It's the people who buy it themselves who are seeing the rise in premiums. But, of those, 85% the people buying insurance through the ACA Marketplace are receiving a subsidy so they aren't affected by increases. So the only people affected by increasing premiums are 15% of people using the ACA, and the people who buy their insurance directly from the insurance company.  Those two groups account for THREE percent of all Americans.