Darryl Issa's Idea for Replacing Obamacare

[dank69]

A top Republican is thinking about how to reform healthcare:

Something seems very familiar about it though. Next step is to figure out how to make it affordable since the healthcare plans currently available to Federal employees are relatively expensive. Oh, and they are actually less free market than the exchanges created by the ACA.

I guess we'll have to see if this revolutionary new idea gains any traction. :hmm:

 

[IronWing]

A top Republican is thinking about how to reform healthcare:


Something seems very familiar about it though. Next step is to figure out how to make it affordable since the healthcare plans currently available to Federal employees are relatively expensive. Oh, and they are actually less free market than the exchanges created by the ACA.

I guess we'll have to see if this revolutionary new idea gains any traction. :hmm:

Yep, the federal employee plans cost substantially more than the exchange plans.

http://www.opm.gov/healthcare-insurance/healthcare/plan-information/premiums/

Looking at the government/employee cost split, one thing I don't get is why the government chips in more for more expensive plan options (equal percentage of each premium). If an employee selects a more expensive plan, the taxpayer pays more. It would make more sense to offer a basic allowance maybe equal to the cheapest plan premium or a percentage of the cheapest premium and anything above that would be the employee's responsibility.

 

[Anarchist420]

I don't know how Darrell Issa got to be that rich if he's that dumb.

 

[PokerGuy]

The first step in trying to get Americans access to affordable health care is .... controlling the cost of the care and thus making it <gasp> affordable. obummercare does nothing to address costs.

 

[Phokus]

I don't know how Darrell Issa got to be that rich if he's that dumb.

"It's not what you know, it's who you know"

 

[Brainonska511]

The first step in trying to get Americans access to affordable health care is .... controlling the cost of the care and thus making it <gasp> affordable. obummercare does nothing to address costs.

I'm curious, what would you do to control costs? Can't we do both simultaneously? Try and get more people covered while also getting at costs from the other side?

 

[thraashman]

I'm curious, what would you do to control costs? Can't we do both simultaneously? Try and get more people covered while also getting at costs from the other side?

The problem is that once you propose the only effective ways to actually control costs, the right will scream socialism at the top of their lungs.

I don't know how Darrell Issa got to be that rich if he's that dumb.

I'm guessing it's because he's dirty. I'm not guessing that he's dirty, I'm guessing that's how he got rich. I KNOW he's dirty.

 

[Engineer]

I'm curious, what would you do to control costs? Can't we do both simultaneously? Try and get more people covered while also getting at costs from the other side?

One of the largest components of high cost is 'people who can't or won't pay'. That cost is bundled into those that do pay. It would seem that having more coverage would help control costs. Will the ACA help lower costs (as it should)? Don't know at this point. I'm assuming the providers will simply keep the prices high and rake in more profits....but I've been wrong before.

 

[PokerGuy]

I'm curious, what would you do to control costs? Can't we do both simultaneously? Try and get more people covered while also getting at costs from the other side?

Sure we can do both simultaneously, but the truth is that nothing has been done, and nothing is being done to attempt to control the costs. All we've done with things like obummercare is increase the scope of government and increased the demand for services, without even touching the factors that make the care itself expensive. Thus all the "making healthcare affordable" stuff is just BS lies to fool the gullible.

 

[Brainonska511]

Sure we can do both simultaneously, but the truth is that nothing has been done, and nothing is being done to attempt to control the costs. All we've done with things like obummercare is increase the scope of government and increased the demand for services, without even touching the factors that make the care itself expensive. Thus all the "making healthcare affordable" stuff is just BS lies to fool the gullible.

Okay. You've spewed a bunch of platitudes at me. But you didn't answer my question: what can we do to control costs, as you insist needs to be done?

 

[trenchfoot]

I see two conditions that Issa is attempting to address with his "plan":

1. Any plan, no matter the cost, is preferable to anything Obama and the Dems can come up with.

2. Any plan that passes muster from the health insurance industry and the for-profit health care providers is a good one because it keeps things just the way they are, which means Issa keeps getting those campaign $$$ rolling in from his aforementioned benefactors.

Yes, by all means let's keep the military well fed and funded so folks like Bush and Cheney can once more use it like their very own private army, navy and air force. And oh yeah, let's also treat those military folks who survived their tour of duty and either retire or fulfill their obligation, many with debilitating injuries acquired in the line of duty, you know, those folks? Let's now treat them exactly like those "profit draining scum" who seek essential life sustaining health care but cannot afford it because like them, these veterans can't be made to turn a profit any more.

The profit makers and takers are the ones who are in the driver's seat as far as where we go with providing the nation with "affordable" health care. For these folks, the mere mention of the word "affordable" sends shivers of disgust and loathing down their spines. They will do anything within their financial and political powers to keep profits at a maximum sustainable level no matter what it does to the general welfare of our nation.

 

[rudder]

Okay. You've spewed a bunch of platitudes at me. But you didn't answer my question: what can we do to control costs, as you insist needs to be done?

You start out by doing the opposite of obamacare. With obamacare (and more so with subsidized plans) the healthcare consumer is removed from the true costs of healthcare. With HSA's and having the consumer deciding how money was spent... There was a marked decrease in spending.

This is one aspect of cost reductions.

Hear that sucking noise? That is the sound of all the doctors who will leave the healthcare industry as obamacare matures.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

So basically he wants obamacare but without any thought put into it.

 

[hal2kilo]

So basically he wants obamacare but without any thought put into it.

Well it certainly won't be 2000 plus pages. Reading is hard you know.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

He could have the best healthcare plan in the world and it wouldn't matter because "Issacare" sounds like something Jar Jar Binks would say. Nobody wants that.

 

[her209]

Lol jar jar would say that.

"Issacare"

 

[Shyatic]

The stupidity of it isn't the idea -- it's the notion that this is even up for debate.

If you have a better idea, get it passed via law and repeal Obamacare. Really, it is that simple. But since the Republicans don't have the votes to repeal, nor the votes to pass anything else (and of course, they only have crappy ideas, not that Obamacare is that great to begin with), they are literally holding the US hostage to play political games.

 

[piasabird]

I think our plan at work costs about $8k a year. The cost of a plan is not what is most important. You have to know what the yearly deductible is and what kind of a copay there is for a regular doctor and a specialist is. The worst part is the prices are different in every state. There are no national standards for healthcare, only a few stupid minimum standards. Why are adults up to age 26 covered on their parent's health care policy? Doesn't this make it all more expensive?

Cant fix stupid.

I think having some kind of clause for preexisting conditions was a good idea, but Some things are cheaper to pay for on your own like birth control and operations for tieing tubes.

 

[dank69]

Sure we can do both simultaneously, but the truth is that nothing has been done, and nothing is being done to attempt to control the costs. All we've done with things like obummercare is increase the scope of government and increased the demand for services, without even touching the factors that make the care itself expensive. Thus all the "making healthcare affordable" stuff is just BS lies to fool the gullible.

How is government supposed to start "touching the factors that make the care itself expensive" without first increasing the scope of government?

 

[Brovane]

Why don't we just let anyone sign-up for MediCare that wants to regardless of age? If it is good enough for those over 65 it should be good enough for the rest of us right?

 

[PokerGuy]

Okay. You've spewed a bunch of platitudes at me. But you didn't answer my question: what can we do to control costs, as you insist needs to be done?

That probably deserves it's own thread, but off the top of my head I can think of a few things that would actually decrease the costs:

Increase the "supply" of doctors, stop artificially reducing the number of doctors that can get medical degrees.

Put the clamps on direct to consumer advertising of drugs. It creates artificial demand for drugs that are not always better than other options, and often cost a lot more.

Tort reform -- fix the crazy lawsuits that drive up the cost of care by making doctors order all sorts of tests and care just to CYA.

Invest money in independent patient outcome / benefit research to figure out what treatments offer the best bang for the buck.

Allow patients who are terminally ill or have a compelling reason to end their life on their terms. That would help reduce some of the extremely expensive efforts made at the end of someone's life if they so choose. (I know I would).

Etc. Lots more options on the table.

Not a single cost of care reduction initiative was included in the health care overhaul, that supposedly was to make it more "affordable". That does not compute.

Another thing that we NEED to do as a society is force people to be more involved in their own health. There are many conditions for which small lifestyle changes are much better "cures" than any drugs, yet we allow people to just go for the drugs without making any changes. I don't know what the details would be (there would need to be a lot of thought put into the "how"), but if insurance or anyone else is to pick up the tab for medicines, it's not unreasonable to expect someone to take steps for their own health.

 

[PokerGuy]

How is government supposed to start "touching the factors that make the care itself expensive" without first increasing the scope of government?

There are plenty of things government can do that don't involve actually providing care or vastly expanding the scope of what it does. The IRS does not need to be involved in the health care process.

 

[piasabird]

By the way medicare has a plan to reduce their compensation by 30%. Doctors will be dropping medicare coverage for this kind of stupidity. Idiots in government just make decisions like this and assume the market will just charge less.

 

[dank69]

There are plenty of things government can do that don't involve actually providing care or vastly expanding the scope of what it does. The IRS does not need to be involved in the health care process.

Name some of those "plenty of things."

 

[dank69]

That probably deserves it's own thread, but off the top of my head I can think of a few things that would actually decrease the costs:

Increase the "supply" of doctors, stop artificially reducing the number of doctors that can get medical degrees.

Put the clamps on direct to consumer advertising of drugs. It creates artificial demand for drugs that are not always better than other options, and often cost a lot more.

Tort reform -- fix the crazy lawsuits that drive up the cost of care by making doctors order all sorts of tests and care just to CYA.

Invest money in independent patient outcome / benefit research to figure out what treatments offer the best bang for the buck.

Allow patients who are terminally ill or have a compelling reason to end their life on their terms. That would help reduce some of the extremely expensive efforts made at the end of someone's life if they so choose. (I know I would).

Etc. Lots more options on the table.

Not a single cost of care reduction initiative was included in the health care overhaul, that supposedly was to make it more "affordable". That does not compute.

Another thing that we NEED to do as a society is force people to be more involved in their own health. There are many conditions for which small lifestyle changes are much better "cures" than any drugs, yet we allow people to just go for the drugs without making any changes. I don't know what the details would be (there would need to be a lot of thought put into the "how"), but if insurance or anyone else is to pick up the tab for medicines, it's not unreasonable to expect someone to take steps for their own health.

Oh, I see you have some listed here. What does the government do to limit the supply of doctors?

Intervene in the free market to stop drug companies from advertising. Check.

Tort reform. Okay but I've been told on many occasions that this has a tiny effect on care costs.

Ooo, number 4, death panels, always a conservative favorite.

Assisted suicide. Pretty sure that will have next to no impact on costs.

Finally we have a nice soapbox speech which would require government to intervene in everyone's lives to make sure they are eating right and exercising.