world

14 million more uninsured under Republican plan in 2018: U.S. budget office

43 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2017 AFP

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

43 Comments
Login to comment

The Affordable Care Act helped 20 million Americans gain coverage.

and screwed 180M others.

-18 ( +2 / -20 )

They should call it the "throw grandma under the bus" law. ACA average premiums for moderate-income seniors (those 64 years old) are $1,400. Under Republicare, they’d pay $14,600 — for coverage only three-fourths as good as that under the ACA.

Still, someone has to sacrifice to get those tax cuts to the 1%. Sorry, grandma.

16 ( +16 / -0 )

They should call it the "throw grandma under the bus" law.

As if Obamacare just was the cheapest thing to buy into, give me a break. It was horrible, 20 million liked it and the rest of us hate it with a passion.

ACA average premiums for moderate-income seniors (those 64 years old) are $1,400. Under Republicare, they’d pay $14,600 — for coverage only three-fourths as good as that under the ACA.

What was so great about the ACA? Why my uncle who is 72 have to buy for prenatal care? He's never going to get pregnant. Why pay for all these unnecessary subsidies that will never be used by a large segment of the population?

Still, someone has to sacrifice to get those tax cuts to the 1%. Sorry, grandma.

Well, if Gruber and Emanuel didn't try to overhaul the entire system we wouldn't be in this mess now to begin with. They just needed to focus on the 20 million that didn't have any insurance, the rest of us were fine. But Democrats will do anything to squeeze a lemon to the last drop.

-16 ( +4 / -20 )

Why my uncle who is 72 have to buy for prenatal care?

It is the basic premise of insurance. Everyone pays premiums to offset the costs of your treatment and others. It is a pooling of risks and a fundamental aspect of insurance. Without the pooling of risks, it would not be insurance.

Why do the right wing always get fixated on prenatal care, but they avoid the male only medical care?

Women also pay into insurance in order to cover prostate cancer and other male only diseases for men in the plan.

The right wing act like prenatal care is elective surgery, breast augmentation, tummy tucks, etc. The fact is prenatal care reduces health complications.

13 ( +13 / -0 )

About 14 million fewer Americans will have health insurance next year under the new Republican plan to replace Obamacare

and

Average health coverage premiums would rise by 15 to 20% in 2018 and 2019 for individual policy holders, it said.

So fewer insured with higher premiums. Nailed it.

The GOP has been trashing the CBO for the past week in anticipation for bad numbers about the plan while at the same time refusing to release their own internal numbers. They don't want to have any conversation whatsoever about higher costs and lower insured. It's all about smiling and saying, "You'll have access..."

8 ( +8 / -0 )

...not to mention, Viking, that pregnancy, while borne by the female, can only be initiated with cooperation (witting or not) of a male.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

Aca is garbage. How is it affordable after you try to sign up then it says i'm sorry you are too poor so heres a plan that might help, then they throw a plan at you costing almost 300 a month but you only make 180 every two weeks because companies nowadays only hire part time to avoid paying health care. Lets not forget what obama said, he said if you couldn't afford it then maybe you should turn your cellphones off and cancel your cable. Like all low income housing can afford both of these things and in this day and age work wants your cell phone number

-10 ( +2 / -12 )

Patience! I think that Trump has a better plan that he can't just lay on the table... at least, not at the moment. Let's just be honest... Obamacare didn't really work. It fined poor people who could not afford it... and even I could not get basic coverage. I am a disabled veteran who needs a secondary insurance. But according to "Obamacare", I make to much on disability to need coverage. Give Trump's idea a chance. Obamacare just didn't work!

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

hopefully, trumpcare might cost the GOP the midterm election in a couple of years. That could set them up for a real beating in 4 years. Assuming Trump hasn't been impeached by then.

6 ( +9 / -3 )

About 14 million fewer Americans will have health insurance next year>

How many of these people are the ones who dont WANT health insurance? Is this really 14 million people that want health insurance and cant get it? I doubt that. Most of these people should be the ones who had to pay the penalty under Obamacare to not have insurance because they couldnt afford the premiums or the deductible made it useless to the average person.

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

About 14 million fewer Americans will have health insurance next year under the new Republican plan to replace Obamacare,

How many will be without health insurance if Obamacare is allowed to continue?

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

As mentioned before, it's just a matter of how many people will lose their medical insurance, since there's no way the new plan do what they want to reduce costs, while still covering the same # millions of people. Covering more people just designates everyone paying more

If politicians are really intent on reducing costs, then they should face up to their constituents and admit that a good portion of them would have to lose their insurance but it's for the sake of lowering the costs. They can't have it both ways - it's either one or the other. They just have to be upfront about it and take the consequences............. if they're really serious

1 ( +1 / -0 )

How many will be without health insurance if Obamacare is allowed to continue?

According to the CBO, about 24 million more. Personally, I think they've lowballed the number.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

As someone who comes from a universal single payer system, I find this horrifying. I don't think I could ever live in a country where illness might bankrupt me or where I can't quit my job because I'll lose my employer subsidised healthcare. It would drive me insane. I don't see how Americans can have an inalienable right to life (liberty and the pursuit of happiness) without that including a right to healthcare to preserves that life. Even the Japanese system makes me feel dirty when I have to reach into my wallet and make a small payment.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

If I was a American. I would be quit annoy that the Government can go around protecting the world of democracy, but can not give their citizens basic free health care. Where you can turn up at any medical place and get treatment for anything illness. 10 percent of the military budget would cover all the citizens of the USA and President Trump is demanding a 5% increase in Military. You can have a basic cover for all but the sense of all being it in together has been replace with I am not pay for other sick people health with MY taxes.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

I wonder how many of the idiots that voted Insane Party will actually lose their cover....

Darwinism I guess....

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Yet the majority of these people would end up buying insurance for themselves as they did before Obamacare came into being.

The problem with America's healthcare is not that it spends too little, as America spends far more per capita for healthcare than any other country in the world. The problem is that much of what is spent is absorbed in bureaucracy, input-oriented programs, and legal expenses. By simply wiping the slate clean, abolishing everything as it stands, and creating an efficient, single-payer system, all Americans could have healthcare for less than half what is currently being spent.

But this would require salary cuts for doctors and nurses (an RN in America can earn a good deal more than an MD in Japan, and an American MD earns more than most Japanese company presidents). It would also mean tort reform, and limiting lawsuit awards. Malpractice insurance is required by law, and is outrageously expensive, and is added to the cost of medical services.

Since the AMA, Insurers, and lawyers all have powerful lobbies, the only option America is to spend ever more, while providing ever less service.

The entire system needs the wrecking ball, and those one-percenters who run it, and use the state pad their profits need to be cut down to size.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

How many will be without health insurance if Obamacare is allowed to continue?

The right wingers just take a criticism and illogically points to ACA without thought or reason.

ACA puts people on healthcare insurance. Indeed, it forces it on them, which is one of the reasons the GoP doesn't like it. It is basically socialism, but so is building bridges and roads.

The GoP plan allows people to choose not to get healthcare insurance, which means more people will pay higher premiums because the healthy are not paying into insurance. Also, employers can get rid of healthcare for their employees, which will force more people out of healthcare insurance.

The simple answer is more people would have health care if the ACA is allowed to continue. 14 million of those with health care would lose health care under the GoP bill and ultimately 24 million total would lose health care.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Aren't Trump supporters generally the people who benefited most from Obamacare? i.e, poor, working class. If so, why did they vote for a man who promised to tear it apart without proposing another plan? What am I missing here?

4 ( +5 / -1 )

"The problem is that much of what is spent is absorbed in bureaucracy,"

That's hilarious. Research finds that pharmaceutical makers price gouge Americans way more than in other countries. In Canada and Europe - which have bigger bureaucracies - costs are considerably cheaper (and the populations healthier and universally covered) thanks to govt regulation that keeps corporate greed in check. THAT'S the difference.

"The U.S. Pays a Lot More for Top Drugs Than Other Countries"

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-drug-prices/

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Will the US drop in world health care rankings from now ? If the US does drop from its current ranking of 37th, that wil not not make America great again ?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

I will never understand why Americans would prefer to pay through the nose rather than have universal free healthcare? Then again I will never understand why they voted for the Great Clown Trump anyway.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

Way to go, GOP !

2 ( +2 / -0 )

bass4funkMAR. 14, 2017 - 10:53AM JST It was horrible, 20 million liked it and the rest of us hate it with a passion.

It's kinda hard to claim that "the rest of us" hated it when the guy who ran on repealing it couldn't even win the majority vote.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

I will never understand why Americans would prefer to pay through the nose rather than have universal free healthcare?

Same here. What's wrong with a good public healthcare system that provides some sort of basic health care services to all, for free?!

As a bloke who's never sick (touch wood) and see a GP roughly once a year, I know my taxes go towards other ppl's health care and I have no problem with that. Health is the one thing that's (or should be) all about solidarity and fairness, for all.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

I don't see how Americans can have an inalienable right to life (liberty and the pursuit of happiness) without that including a right to healthcare to preserves that life

Like what veterans fought for, right ? Actually the worst delays in necessary care are at the VA Hospital. I don't know one ex serviceman who prefers to use their own pure single payer government run system over a private, or even public, hospital.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

goldorak, big thumbs up. I pay big into NHI here and seldom need medical treatment (maybe once a year), but I'm 51 so know that might change soon - and it's comforting to know that other payers have my back. That is the definition of "insurance" - pray you never need it but know someday you will.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

seriously, what an inept country

5 ( +7 / -2 )

It is the basic premise of insurance

Health insurance provides important financial protection in case you have a serious accident or illness. Prenatal care, birth control, mental health services etc is everyone paying everyone elses bill, which is covered oftentimes by Medicaid or other welfare programs. By definition they do not meet the definition of insurance.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

So all Americans, even the poor, old and disabled will have insurance is the biggest alternative fact.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The problem with America's healthcare is not that it spends too little, as America spends far more per capita for healthcare than any other country in the world.

Agreed. But what do you think about the fact that in America (anywhere else?), hospitals and clinics now employ more staff to take care of all of the various insurers' paperwork, than they do people delivering the healthcare directly (MDs, nurses, technicians, etc.)?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Big insurance, pharma, medicine and their lobbyists are quietly dictating the legeslation while their corporate MSM lackeys keep most divided and confused. Obama had a chance but fell to his knees to the above. No one expects Trump or the Reps to initiate a single payer system which is the only answer. The medical regulators keep a tight fist around who can become a doctor in the US, limiting successful applications and only recognizing residencies in the US. As long as citizens switch between FOXMSNBCCNN, nothing will change. These corporations are NOT news organizations, their main purpose is to suppress and withhold alternative information, and keep the dialog divisive.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Like what veterans fought for, right ? Actually the worst delays in necessary care are at the VA Hospital. I don't know one ex serviceman who prefers to use their own pure single payer government run system over a private, or even public, hospital.

Reasonable response. A flaw is found and attacked. A very reasonable thing to say, but it is also fair to point out that the the reason the VA has problems is that the GOP has, time and time again, voted cut funding or leave them lacking and funding. That doesn't mean a single payer system doesn't work, it just means the GOP wants it to fail. Even if it means killing veterans.

Health insurance provides important financial protection in case you have a serious accident or illness. Prenatal care, birth control, mental health services etc is everyone paying everyone elses bill, which is covered oftentimes by Medicaid or other welfare programs. By definition they do not meet the definition of insurance.

And now here, I really do not understand this one. How do they not meet the definition? Prenatal, I get. That is not unforeseeable- we know how pregnancy happens. But mental healthcare? We don't exactly know. And many times, patients have no control of the events led up to a mental health episode.

Look, if the GOP and other detractors think folks deserve to die because they cannot afford to pay for their healthcare- that's fine! Just have the stones to say that. US healthcare is by no measure superior to healthcare systems in the developed world.

To those wondering why Americans object to a single payer system: Fear tactics basically. Healthcare and Insurance industries have promoted the idea that having a single payer system would mean "death panels" etc. They've also been led to believe in this false dichotomy of "free" vs. "not free." If you have a single payer system, you are not free, whereas if you don't have such a system you are "free." Likewise, American voters are also subjected to the nonsensical false dichotomy of either being a socialist or free market, but of course elements of both exist in any economy.

Again, I really just wish Republicans would come right out and admit that they're fine with poor people dying, because that's what is going to happen if this bill is passed.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Again, I really just wish Republicans would come right out and admit that they're fine with poor people dying, because that's what is going to happen if this bill is passed.

Personally I think this legislation is a realistic start at Obamacare replacement, most conservatives hate the bill, but that said, I would like to see them plan to disentangle government the rest of the way from the whole deal over the next 8 years. If you don't think budget cuts of the VA are going to play out across a fully single payer system I don't know what to say -- just look at what is happening in Britain and across Europe.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Unless you get a single payer system like every other rational country in the world, the USA will go back to its age of decline. Japan's insurance system style would have also worked. Fixing Obamacare would have been about increasing care not removing it.

Unless of course your are a Republican, then how you feel about human life doesn't match the rest of the planet anyway. Expecting the rest of us to understand isn't going to happen. I honestly look at GOP voters as having some kind of a mental disorder against empathy.

I had surgery recently. It wasn't emergency so I waited a month, got it done, and feeling fine. I'm fine with that. Just walked in and got the system rolling. I paid taxes for years and I don't mind paying them. Taxes help support society and occasionally society helps support me back. That's what insurance is all about.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Sometimes politicians value ideology over evidence. The GOP hates the mandate, calling it un-American and other things. But the evidence suggests that we need it to get enough people into to sustain the system. What won in this case? Ideology. The win was for their conservative ideology, and the loser was the healthcare plan.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

There are two plans now. RyanCare andTrumpCare.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

For me the ACA under the Obama admin was affordable when it first started, for about 1 year. Then my health insurance provider went bankrupt, which meant I would have to re-apply under a more expensive healthcare plan, which was just a another cherry on top of rising cost of living prices (while still under the Obama admin). So now the GOP has it in their hands, and they're just going to make sure it's even worse.

Nationalized healthcare where all I have to do is pay reasonable taxes for coverage like the smart countries do... yes please. It will be so much cheaper than our current for profit shareholder money gouging scheme.

The only ones who will lose money are the greedy corporate sectors that are in "healthcare".

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I had many friends who elected to pay the penalty the last 3 yrs under the ACA because it was much, much, less than the insurance costs.

Their premiums were in the $10K/yr range. They've been buying retail medical service the last decade after having heart surgery.

I hate to admit this, but we need a single payer solution capped at 10% GDP. Let's work on the Amendment to get 'er done.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

“Nobody will be worse off financially in the process that we’re going through,” Price said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

Indeed, as long as they don't fall ill. The conservative Republican party is rife with lying demogues.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites