ACA has provided basic assurance that consumers can shop for insurance with confidence

Ray Jay wrote:Ricky:

ACA has provided basic assurance that consumers can shop for insurance with confidence

or be fined for not doing so.

Price’s bill would add substantially to the deficit. It calls for a variety of new tax credits, including a less-generous version of the ObamaCare health-insurance subsidies for lower-income Americans. It also calls for federal funding to help lower insurance costs for those with pre-existing conditions, and it allows individuals who buy their own insurance to deduct the cost from their taxable income.

All of that costs money. But unlike ObamaCare, which at least funds itself through higher taxes, the Price plan makes no effort to pay for itself. That’s probably why more than four years after its introduction, no fiscal analysis by the Congressional Budget Office has been requested. Such an analysis would tell the world that his plan is financially infeasible

or be fined for not doing so

Now that there is a plan, what do you think of it, Rick

rickyp wrote:And relies upon magical thinking rather than fiscal reality.

rickyp wrote:Prices Bill was introduced in 2009 and 2011 .There has been no request for the CBO to score the bill and Even a subcommittee on which Price himself is a member has taken no action on the bill.

Here's why:

Price’s bill would add substantially to the deficit. It calls for a variety of new tax credits, including a less-generous version of the ObamaCare health-insurance subsidies for lower-income Americans. It also calls for federal funding to help lower insurance costs for those with pre-existing conditions, and it allows individuals who buy their own insurance to deduct the cost from their taxable income.

All of that costs money. But unlike ObamaCare, which at least funds itself through higher taxes, the Price plan makes no effort to pay for itself. That’s probably why more than four years after its introduction, no fiscal analysis by the Congressional Budget Office has been requested. Such an analysis would tell the world that his plan is financially infeasible

.

price even presented his plan back to Obama in 09. Obama's response then was
“If you say that we can extend coverage to all Americans and it won’t cost a penny, that’s just not true,” he told Price. “You cannot structure a bill in which suddenly 30 million people have coverage, and it costs nothing.”

rickyp wrote:ray

or be fined for not doing so

Well that goes down to personal responsibility doesn't it?

rickyp wrote:bbauska

Now that there is a plan, what do you think of it, Rick

y

I think it was a crappy idea in 09 and 11.
And relies upon magical thinking rather than fiscal reality.

Almost as much as the ACA was/is

Writing in the Washington Post, Ezra Klein said that the bill had some good ideas but that it would not work. In particular he said "its version of the health insurance exchanges will collapse pretty quickly because the bill contains

no individual mandate ensuring that the pool includes both healthy and sick individuals
no insurance market regulations stopping insurers from cherrypicking
no risk adjustment rebalancing the scales when they do."
He said "In other words, this looks much like the reforms that collapsed in Texas, and in California. Price isn't learning from past policy mistakes, and so he means to repeat them." The good elements, he said, were its proposal for automatic enrollment (of employees in employer health care schemes) and the extension of tax exemption on the purchase of private insurance by buyers in the individual insurance market currently enjoyed by the employed. These, however, would be capped at "the average value of the national health exclusion for Employer Sponsored Insurance (and not at the true cost). He pointed out that this tax exemption amounts to a huge tax increase, but said that "(Tom) Price won't call it that".[2] Presumably this is because the exemption is not specifically tax funded but would increase the deficit and would have to be paid for from taxes eventually.

The medical journalist Maggie Mahar has criticized the bill for the suggestion that people with pre-existing conditions should be moved into high risk pools run in each state. She points out that that existing state-based high risk pools can’t provide affordable coverage for nearly enough of the medically needy who have no other option, and that others have noted how "high-risk pools have been around for over 30 years and currently exist in 35 states, but they only cover about 207,000 Americans. The biggest barrier to enrollment is cost. High-risk pools are inevitably expensive because all of the enrollees have medical conditions that could potentially result in costly medical bills, which means the pools cannot spread costs across low-risk and high-risk individuals. Despite attempts to cap premium rates, the coverage is still unaffordable for many. In fact, a recent study found that premiums for high-risk pools are unaffordable for about one-third of eligible individuals.

Well, except my article was dated May 13, 2015.
Is Price's 2015 plan EXACTLY like the 2009 and 2011 plans? Do tell.

danivon wrote:Being a medical doctor may make you a medical expert.

But that is not the same as expertise in the economics of medicine. Indeed, it may just provide a false sense of expertise which masks a bias.

danivon wrote:Being a medical doctor may make you a medical expert.

But that is not the same as expertise in the economics of medicine. Indeed, it may just provide a false sense of expertise which masks a bias.

rickyp wrote:bbauska

Almost as much as the ACA was/is

The ACA is funded. and ha the required mandates to ensure that it works.

Writing in the Washington Post, Ezra Klein said that the bill had some good ideas but that it would not work. In particular he said "its version of the health insurance exchanges will collapse pretty quickly because the bill contains

no individual mandate ensuring that the pool includes both healthy and sick individuals
no insurance market regulations stopping insurers from cherrypicking
no risk adjustment rebalancing the scales when they do."
He said "In other words, this looks much like the reforms that collapsed in Texas, and in California. Price isn't learning from past policy mistakes, and so he means to repeat them." The good elements, he said, were its proposal for automatic enrollment (of employees in employer health care schemes) and the extension of tax exemption on the purchase of private insurance by buyers in the individual insurance market currently enjoyed by the employed. These, however, would be capped at "the average value of the national health exclusion for Employer Sponsored Insurance (and not at the true cost). He pointed out that this tax exemption amounts to a huge tax increase, but said that "(Tom) Price won't call it that".[2] Presumably this is because the exemption is not specifically tax funded but would increase the deficit and would have to be paid for from taxes eventually.

The medical journalist Maggie Mahar has criticized the bill for the suggestion that people with pre-existing conditions should be moved into high risk pools run in each state. She points out that that existing state-based high risk pools can’t provide affordable coverage for nearly enough of the medically needy who have no other option, and that others have noted how "high-risk pools have been around for over 30 years and currently exist in 35 states, but they only cover about 207,000 Americans. The biggest barrier to enrollment is cost. High-risk pools are inevitably expensive because all of the enrollees have medical conditions that could potentially result in costly medical bills, which means the pools cannot spread costs across low-risk and high-risk individuals. Despite attempts to cap premium rates, the coverage is still unaffordable for many. In fact, a recent study found that premiums for high-risk pools are unaffordable for about one-third of eligible individuals.

fate

Well, except my article was dated May 13, 2015.
Is Price's 2015 plan EXACTLY like the 2009 and 2011 plans? Do tell.

well, we know he changed the date.