Taking Points Memo provided a list of 20 times the GOP has promised to replace Obamacare
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/gop-obamacare-alternative-promises
This is done for the benefit for Chief Justice John Roberts-and possibly also for Justice Anthony Kennedy-to assure them that if the kill the federal government exchanges they will come up with a f'ix'-even though that's not at all high on their priorities list. but they need to convince Roberts that it is so he can gut the exchanges.
Maybe he should consider recent history in trying to judge their sincerity: remember when he and his court gutted Clause 4 of the Voting Rights Act? The Court seemed to think that the GOP
Congress was going to get right on 'updating it' but it looks now like their plan is just to leave it stricken with no counter plan.
Then we have the fact that even when conservatives meet amongst themselves about conservative alternatives to Obamacare they decide that what ever a conservative health care plan has as an objective, it isn't universal care or even that as many people as possible have healthcare.
None of the potential 2016 Republican presidential candidates has thought more about the Affordable Care Act than Jindal, and none of the others has come up with a plan as detailed as his. Jindal's key provision is to eliminate the tax break for employer-provided health coverage and instead offer a deduction with which people could buy insurance in the individual market.
http://www.fresnobee.com/2015/02/04/4363169/ramesh-ponnuru-bobby-jindal-shows.html
The GOP can't even agree among itself on what an alternative is but the goal is not or more people to have coverage. The GOP healthcare alternative is basically a myth up there with the GOP immigration reform alternative or the or the fix to the Voting Rights Act: at the end of the day their alternative to ACA is the 2008 status quo-the Bush status quo. No wonder their leading candidate is another Bush.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/gop-obamacare-alternative-promises
This is done for the benefit for Chief Justice John Roberts-and possibly also for Justice Anthony Kennedy-to assure them that if the kill the federal government exchanges they will come up with a f'ix'-even though that's not at all high on their priorities list. but they need to convince Roberts that it is so he can gut the exchanges.
Maybe he should consider recent history in trying to judge their sincerity: remember when he and his court gutted Clause 4 of the Voting Rights Act? The Court seemed to think that the GOP
Congress was going to get right on 'updating it' but it looks now like their plan is just to leave it stricken with no counter plan.
Then we have the fact that even when conservatives meet amongst themselves about conservative alternatives to Obamacare they decide that what ever a conservative health care plan has as an objective, it isn't universal care or even that as many people as possible have healthcare.
None of the potential 2016 Republican presidential candidates has thought more about the Affordable Care Act than Jindal, and none of the others has come up with a plan as detailed as his. Jindal's key provision is to eliminate the tax break for employer-provided health coverage and instead offer a deduction with which people could buy insurance in the individual market.
"The great flaw in Jindal's plan is that it would cause millions of people to lose their coverage. Deductions are more valuable to those in high tax brackets, and they wouldn't provide much help for the lower-income people whom Obamacare allowed to enroll in Medicaid. Many of the people now covered under Obamacare's exchanges would also lose their coverage. And some of those now covered by their employers would find their plans threatened as younger and healthier employees used the new deduction to leave those plans for the individual market."
"In a new op-ed, Jindal suggests that his plan has some advantages over other Republican alternatives. His target, though he doesn't name it, is a proposal outlined last year by Sens. Richard Burr, Tom Coburn, and Orrin Hatch. That proposal would enable many more people to get coverage than Jindal's plan would, because it would offer tax credits instead of deductions. And it would leave most people in employer-provided coverage safe because people could use the credit to buy individual coverage only if they didn't have access to an employer plan."
"Jindal identifies two defects in the higher-coverage plan, which he calls "Obamacare Lite." It would be more costly than his proposal. The way he puts it is that it would repeal only some of Obamacare's taxes instead of all of them. And it would discourage work. The credits shrink with income, so people wouldn't reap the full rewards for working longer or getting raises."
http://www.fresnobee.com/2015/02/04/4363169/ramesh-ponnuru-bobby-jindal-shows.html
The GOP can't even agree among itself on what an alternative is but the goal is not or more people to have coverage. The GOP healthcare alternative is basically a myth up there with the GOP immigration reform alternative or the or the fix to the Voting Rights Act: at the end of the day their alternative to ACA is the 2008 status quo-the Bush status quo. No wonder their leading candidate is another Bush.
No comments:
Post a Comment