world

An estimated 23 mil would lose health insurance under Republican bill

32 Comments

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

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2017.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

32 Comments
Login to comment

Don the Con strikes again! During the campaign: “We’re going to have insurance for everybody... There was a philosophy in some circles that if you can’t pay for it, you don’t get it. That’s not going to happen with us.”

During his presidency:

9 ( +9 / -0 )

Just remember: 23 million Americans in order to give the wealthiest Americans a tax cut. Couple that with the Trump budget, and we have the GOP vision of America: one where some Americans live the dream while others try to just live.

16 ( +16 / -0 )

Waiting for the pro-eugenics rightists to claim it's for the better, those 20+ million people are a drain on the resources of the rich, that spending to help those 20+ million might reduce the amount spent on developing even bigger and more destructive weapons. Waiting for the greed-is-good rightists to claim by having to pay lower taxes the rich will be able to trickle down on the rest in stronger streams. Waiting for the true believing rightists to deny the polls saying a majority of Americans favored the ACA - because the polls were wrong about Trump'ss election.

Trump and the Republicans: doing whatever they can to 'insure' the wealthiest maintain their fortunes. The other 99%?

Thank you Japan for allowing me to have health insurance coverage.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

House Speaker Paul Ryan, said the report showed the legislation met key goals,

Like denying sick people insurance coverage.

All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

I am a supporter of single payer. I like Japan's system, albeit imperfect, it works. As a business owner I pay 50% of the insurance premium and the employees pay 50%. The rate is graduated based on income. I think it is a fair system.

I think neither plan (ACA), which forces people to buy something from a for profit insurance company is not viable. Many states are down to one insurance provider. I think the Republican plan would be worse.

But this is the U.S.; all is going down to the lowest common denominator and as one that is vehemently against Trump I can say this started long before Trump entered the political minefield

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Lovely. So we'll strip food benefits from children and remove health insurance for 23 million Americans. More and more home runs from the GOP.

This just in from Fox News:

"Plus, his approval among whites without a college degree went from 62 percent last month to 53 percent now. Working-class whites were a key voting bloc for him in the election (66 percent backed Trump according to the Fox News Exit Poll)."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/24/fox-news-poll-trump-approval-down-voters-support-special-counsel-on-russia.html

The SNAP and Medicaid cuts for these people will be brutal in the poorer red states. Looks like they voted a group of people into office who are now skinning them alive. Hope it was worth it.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

Look at the bright side, 23 million less free loaders!

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

What most people fail to realize is that many of those who lose their state-funded healthcare would buy their own insurance, as many of them did before the ACA was implemented.

The problem with healthcare in America is not left or right, but both. Republicans are in the pockets of the private insurers, democrats are in the pockets of the contractors who are hired to run the public insurance system. The ACA is a combination of both evils, and is an extremely expensive and inefficient system. With the ACA, you get the need for profit from the private insurance companies who participate, and the need for graft for the contractors who operate the public side.

There are only two options, either completely scrap healthcare in America as we know it, and move to a completely public, single-payer system, or make it 100% private and unsubsidized.

The former guarantees coverage for everyone, though it is very likely that it will be a hugely money-losing program (like every other entitlement program run by the state). The latter leaves people on their own to pay for their own healthcare. But absent the market distortions created by state subsidies, the end cost of healthcare would be a fraction of what it now, making it more affordable for insurers and individuals.

But don't count on either republicans or democrats to come up with an efficient healthcare system which is fair and inexpensive.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

I know it's enjoyable and easy and the first knee-jerk reaction is to blame "Don the con" Trump, but it's really unfounded. Take a look at this..

https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php?showYear=2017&indexType=s

If you scroll through the years, you'll find that the following medical/insurance corporations and Associations have consistently been in the top 5 to 10 category of lobbyists.

Blue Cross/Blue Shield

American Hospital Assn

Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers of America

American Medical Assn

Nothing will change until we STOP voting for Dems and Reps. And no, I'm not talking about Presidential elections, but Congress.

In 2017:

1 Pharmaceuticals/Health Products - $78,142,678 2 Insurance - $40,155,621 3 Oil & Gas - $36,143,101

Universal health care will come to the US. It may take 5 years or 30 years, but it will come. I say, might as well do it now. If Nader was elected President we would have it. But nope, Al Gore was the MAN! thanks to our wonderful MSM for the help. pathetic.

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

@Fizzbit

Just to get it straight, are you saying Trump doesn't shoulder any responsibility at all for 23 million US citizens being put in this position?

6 ( +6 / -0 )

@Jimzo

It doesn't have to be a Dem/Rep thing. You are doing EXACTLY what "they" want. Keep it up. But since you must, Obama endlessly promised to cut premiums per family by $2500. How did that go?

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

Don the Con strikes again! During the campaign: “We’re going to have insurance for everybody... There was a philosophy in some circles that if you can’t pay for it, you don’t get it. That’s not going to happen with us.”

During his presidency:

At the same time, you're cutting almost $120 billion and premiums which was the catalyst as to why people were so angry with the ACA. You have to be a fool to think something was mit going to get cut and at this point Medicaid seemed to be the better option, either way, someone's going to get hurt and judging by the millions more that DO have Obamacare, those people wanted lower premiums and greatly outnumber the people that are on Medicaid.

This is the conundrum that we are all getting once the government sticks its dirty hands into people's business, this is what you get. I was always for fixing the system for those that didn't have insurance, but was always against greedy Gruber and Emanuel completely hijacking the system, I blame the Dems pushing it through without thinking about the costs and the ramifications and I blame the Republicans for doing pretty much the same, I'm more fortunate because I pay as I go, I would never buy none of that crap, but I do have empathy for what may come and even if the Dems were to get back in power, this situation will only get worse and once the country goes Single payer, all I can say is good luck to them. But once again, both parties are to blame. This is not about Obama or Trump, they talk and in this case can't do much, but as far as congress is concerned, They're all ineffective and completely incompetent donkeys and elephants, the hell with them both.

-11 ( +0 / -11 )

23 million, shish, that is peanuts. Abe will trump that with 120 million taxpayers.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

It doesn't have to be a Dem/Rep thing

I didn't say it was and you make some valid points.

I'm not saying that other factors aren't at work. I asked if Trump shoulders any responsibility for this situation. 'Any' is the key word.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

$119 billion in savings by stripping 23 million Americans of health insurance, while spending $500 billion more on the military over the same time period. And a huge tax break for the rich.

GOP leadership.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

 I asked if Trump shoulders any responsibility

I just don't see the point in playing the Dem/Rep game. They are BOTH equally responsible for caving to lobbyists and big medical/pharma/insurance.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

$119 billion in savings by stripping 23 million Americans of health insurance, while spending $500 billion more on the military over the same time period. And a huge tax break for the rich.

GOP leadership.

I disagree you in almost every issue, but on this, you have to be really in a unicornverse to think that either party cares about you and you have to be crazier to think that either party will do a better with this problem, both parties you can blame Trump, but you think Pelosi and company care deeply about the American people, you think Ryan do? Wake up, they don't. Congress gets free healthcare and the best. That's it. Put the partisan rhetoric aside. Ask yourself a more serious question and that is "why would they care?"

-9 ( +2 / -11 )

I just don't see the point in playing the Dem/Rep game

I'm not the first to notice, and this isn't the first example of how Trump supporters talk like evasive politicians to defend a man they like because he doesn't talk or act like a politician.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

The savings is also in the reduction in quality of coverage. So, 24 million are not covered, but many more are hit with worse coverage and more costs.

Piketty wrote a watershed book on economics in 2014 about capital and wealth. The book basically said that the wealthy can only get wealthier, and the non-wealthy will forever be non-wealthy. Basically because capital returns are higher than economic growth, and there is a trend to shelter the wealthy from wealth redistribution, which was originally an American concept to prevent or at least slow down EU style oligarchies.

Now we have a government with policies that accelerate this trend, and we have a people who have made wealth redistribution a bad word and no benefit for the economy. Why would a poor person say they are against the estate tax? It doesn't impact them. The problem is that they are consuming half the arguments, i.e., the strict concept of liberty, but not the concepts of oligarchies or true wealth.

All of the GoP's and Trump's policies shift money to the wealthiest 1% of Americans, and there is nothing left for America itself or non-wealthy Americans. In fact, this shift craters the deficit and is detrimental to America. More of the wealthiest of Americans are wealthy by inheritance, and not because they were some internet genius or created the wealth themselves. Their families will always be wealthy, and no missteps will change that fact. Similarly, people who are not wealthy will in nearly all cases forever remain that way, and no correct steps will change that fact.

I don't always agree with Fizzbit, but I will agree that lobbyists are the only real power in America. And, the power is exerted by those with money to the detriment of those without that power, 99% of the population.

We now have billionaires making policy, and those policies are aimed to benefit themselves and those like them.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Some of the comments are interesting. No one has lost health insurance yet so there is nothing to blame anyone for. I think at this time the 23 million is an estimate, which may or may not come true. The arguments for the ACA indicated premiums would go down $2,500 and Americans would be able to keep their health care provider/insurance company if they liked their plan. None of that happened.

As for the 23 million...it could be more...could be less. I think before casting blame for anything people should wait to see what happens.

As for me I am happy to be in Japan where there is a sensible system which is at least close to fair and has mechanisms to provide coverage for nearly all.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

I'm not the first to notice, and this isn't the first example of how Trump supporters talk like evasive politicians to defend a man they like because he doesn't talk or act like a politician.

I really have no idea what you're talking about. I never defended Trump on this thread. Just trying to point out how useless and a waste of time it is to point the finger at one person. Your partisan blame game just doesn't belong here.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

The GOP talked themselves into a corner as the minority and now they are forced to follow through with dumb policy because their gerrymandered districts have an even further right candidates waiting to stab them in the back if they don't.

This isn't a fix to Obamacare. They talked that off the table. The GOP is going to severely harm the poor people who put them into office by siding with the rich people who put them into office.

I believe the word is "expendable".

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Don't worry about it - chances are that the impoverished and oppressed won't vote. Funny that.

Sad actually.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

bass4funkToday  10:08 am JST

At the same time, you're cutting almost $120 billion and premiums which was the catalyst as to why people were so angry with the ACA. 

Prove it.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Read the story and check the stats. The Dems lost mostly because people were fed up with not being able to pay for their premiums, by the way, where are the Democrats these days?

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

Read the story and check the stats. The Dems lost mostly because people were fed up with not being able to pay for their premiums, by the way, where are the Democrats these days?

Dems lost because voters on both sides were stupid. I can say the same for the candidates, primary and general.

You can't point to premiums or ACA as the reason. The majority of people support ACA now that they realize what they will lose under ACHA, and the GoP is getting blasted by constituents because of the position. The ACA needs fixes, but the only fix the GoP sees is getting rid of the tax on wealthy.

The GoP is actually trying to pull a fast one on the public by not letting anyone really know what is in ACHA. There was a lack of visibility with ACA, but there still wasn't as much skulking going on as there is now.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

read the story and check the stats.

I dont believe in stats. Howbaddah?

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Strangerland Today  09:06 am JST

Look at the bright side, 23 million less free loaders!

  -6 ( +0 / -6 )

Your sarcasm is sickening and I believe their are a lot of freeloaders on the system. I believe those that need help and a hand up merit help from the government, not those that want a handout for life. We need to help those that have the handout mentality to better themselves out of poverty.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

@Supirlib

The GOP is going to severely harm the poor people who put them into office by siding with the rich people who put them into office.

You 2 Brutus? Again with the blame game. Obama had Dem control of the House and Senate until 2011. Good time to pass a healthcare Bill for the people. NOT! He was lobbied. See above post and get real.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

According to the White House, two trillion dollars is missing from the accounting of the budget which mean two trillion dollars underestimated. Two trillion dollars!

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Dems lost because voters on both sides were stupid. I can say the same for the candidates, primary and general.

Hmmmm....

You can't point to premiums or ACA as the reason.

Oh, yes, you can, it's not the only reason, but definitely a huge reason.

The majority of people support ACA now that they realize what they will lose under ACHA, and the GoP is getting blasted by constituents because of the position.

By a few that are on Medicaid, but the majority want lower premiums, that's one of the issues that were on the voters mind and you are talking about the people that have it, you didn't mention anything about the people that can't afford it or the people that don't want or need it.

The ACA needs fixes, but the only fix the GoP sees is getting rid of the tax on wealthy.

again, you're not focusing on the lowering costs. We could've kept everything the same, but then more people would've gotten angrier. So I think it's a good thing. I don't need it, but for those that do, this helps a lot.

The GoP is actually trying to pull a fast one on the public by not letting anyone really know what is in ACHA. There was a lack of visibility with ACA, but there still wasn't as much skulking going on as there is now.

Oh, geez, now where did I hear something like that a few years ago....."if you like your doctor you can keep him" Gosh do. I wish you guys thought that passionately about this issue 8 years ago.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

As long as it stays a business for profit nothing is going to change.

make all the bills you want and call it whatever but its just a band-aid.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

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