General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRs actually release specifics on ACA reform
Last edited Mon Mar 6, 2017, 08:09 PM - Edit history (2)
No more employer mandate.
Medicaid expansion allowed to continue thru 2020. Afterward, no further expansion. States that did expand grandfather in.
Kids can stay on parents insurance until 26
Subsidies for coverage will be phased out and replaced by tax credits
Can't remember the rest. Saw it on CNN.
Four R Senators for states that did the Medicaid expansion sent a letter to McConnell saying they would vote against the entire package if it fucked with Medicaid. That leaves Rs 2 votes short of passage in the Senate if and when it gets there.
MichMary
(1,714 posts)stopbush
(24,395 posts)Took 3 attempts to fix it.
DeadLetterOffice
(1,352 posts)"also largely would keep Obamacare's protections of those with pre-existing conditions, but allows insurers to charge higher premiums to those who let their coverage lapse."
http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/06/politics/republicans-public-obamacare-plan/index.html
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,402 posts)n/t
BumRushDaShow
(128,748 posts)The Senate has that type of rule but some in the Senate are already pretty much declaring this House version DOA.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,402 posts)Just wondering if the Pubs could push this through reconciliation.
BumRushDaShow
(128,748 posts)but it still needs a majority in the Senate (51-49) and right now, they don't have it with 4 GOP Senators indicating they may not support it.
Cha
(297,099 posts)Millions.
Good Luck!
stopbush
(24,395 posts)My wife and I are on a crappy high deductible plan these days.
Funny, but we added a dental plan @ $21 a month to our crappy health insurance, and that dental plan is really good.
Cha
(297,099 posts)angrychair
(8,690 posts)No need to discuss it any further. Nothing else matters.
Tax credits don't pay monthly premiums.
Rstrstx
(1,399 posts)My understanding is that if (and that's a huge if) it's a refundable tax credit that's also advanceable it should act in a similar way that the current subsidy based system operates; i.e., the government is essentially sending the money from your tax break straight to the insurance company as to lower your up-front monthly payment.
I would hope that that is how the current proposal would work, any other way of structuring it would be DOA for all intents and purposes.
But there's something else bothering me about the House proposal, and I haven't been able to find an answer to it. Basically the question is what happens to someone who doesn't enroll in anything at all since there's no longer a mandate? Will there be a sort of default buy-in policy that happens to cost exactly what your tax credit is? And who then decides which company would get the tax credit for such a default policy? Wouldn't this make the individual mandate kind of a moot point? (surely the money wouldn't be returned to deadbeats?!! Some Rs might be crazy enough to want to do that but the insurance companies are not going to let that happen, not ever).