A Letter to Donald Trump About Health Care

[Cigar]

By David Leonhardt DEC. 27, 2016


Dear Mr. President-elect:

Your position on universal health insurance has been admirably clear. You support it. You did before you ran for president and continued to do so in the campaign.

In 2000, you wrote, “We must have universal healthcare.” In a Fox News debate last year, you said, “We have to take care of the people that can’t take care of themselves.” On “60 Minutes,” you said, “Everybody’s got to be covered.”

I am writing to you now because I am concerned that Republicans in Congress do not share your goal and are not giving you good advice on this issue. I’m worried that they are not acting in the best interests of your presidency or the country. I encourage you to be skeptical of them.

It is entirely possible for you to sign a conservative health care bill that lives up to your belief in universal coverage. It’s a bill that you could celebrate as a replacement of Obamacare. But it would be quite different from the bills that congressional Republicans are pushing...

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/27/opinion/a-letter-to-donald-trump-about-health-care.html?_r=0

[Grizz]

That deal could give states more flexibility to meet the top-line coverage goals.

First, let's define what I am talking about, individual coverage.
All 4 levels of coverage have the same ten basic and mandated coverages. The only real changes to anything above Bronze is where the insured STOPS paying. Of course there are varying deductibles but frankly these are nothing but "feel good" numbers. The insured "feels" better if the carrier starts paying sooner, the truth is that that is not as important as where they (the insured) STOPS paying. The SOONER the carrier starts paying (lower deductible) the higher the premium is, and in many cases the end result (maximum out of pocket) remains the same. This is a con, but it indeed does make the insured "feel better".

It could rely more heavily on subsidies to bring healthy people into the market — and ultimately scrap the mandate.

These are the two main sticking points, and unfortunately both are intrinsically involved in any program that could potentially replace the ACA.
Remove the mandate and the young (those that are now obeying, and relatively few are) will automatically drop out. They frankly just don't see the urgency that will once they reach about 30, or when they have kids.
The subsidies, remove the young or the healthy people and the subsidies (and the premiums) will necessarily skyrocket to make up the difference.

The mandate, scrap it and the entire law breaks down. You will always have a percentage of people feel the need to obey the law, and that brings in those healthy people so desperately needed to keep the program afloat.

It all revolves around money, the dollars.

It could permit insurers to charge young people less (and older people more).

Currently the law allows insurers to charge older people no more than 3 times the amount of the young. On the face of it that seems "fair", but the reality is that the insurer cannot stay afloat (keep the company solvent) by or with that limitation. The years above 50 are the most expensive medically. The catch 22 is that if they are allowed to charge what they need to nobody can afford it....so you raise the subsidy you say.... guess who pays for that?

It could create incentives for personal responsibility, allowing higher prices for people who have voluntarily gone without insurance.

This makes no sense at all, none.
It's already too high, and the people who have gone without will continue to do so. There is no easy solution , nor any inexpensive one.

[Cigar]

What I pay for a Car is already too high ... :laugh:

What Decade of Health Care Insurance are you trying to equal of go below?

Name that Year

[Grizz]

I pointed out that the author really doesn't have a grasp on what is currently wrong with the law. Did you want to discuss that, or are you just wanting to throw dirt clods at whitey again?

I am not trying to hit any price points, I am however trying to point out that there is no simple way out of this mess. Make no mistake, it IS a mess and it is one that will implode soon if not addressed.

[birddog]

Universal Healthcare does not have to be Single Payer.

[Cigar]

Come-On guys, what should Health Care Cost ...

Name the price of Victory

[Grizz]

LOL, a troll is a troll is a troll.

[DGUtley]

I was and am adamantly against Obamacare. Not because the creator happened to be our first African American President, but because, inter alia, I think it was more about control then health insurance, the underhanded and deceptive way it was passed, the exemptions, the lack of choice, the imposition of criteria (pregnancy coverage for men - by way of example), the imposition on the Church, etc. The D's truly showed us that elections have consequences and that those that lose have to shut up and get in the back seat, as we were told.

Nevertheless, we do have a problem. We had a problem in 08 which the D's tried to address, and we still have a problem. Now, the R's will soon 'own it'. They better be wise.

[Docthehun]

I was and am adamantly against Obamacare. Not because the creator happened to be our first African American President, but because, inter alia, I think it was more about control then health insurance, the underhanded and deceptive way it was passed, the exemptions, the lack of choice, the imposition of criteria (pregnancy coverage for men - by way of example), the imposition on the Church, etc. The D's truly showed us that elections have consequences and that those that lose have to shut up and get in the back seat, as we were told.

Nevertheless, we do have a problem. We had a problem in 08 which the D's tried to address, and we still have a problem. Now, the R's will soon 'own it'. They better be wise.

Back at the inception of the ACA I advised my Party to work with the Democrats and see if we couldn't work out a bi-partisan solution to fix the shortcomings of the initial legislation. They failed to do so, intent instead on "Repeal", which just isn't a viable solution and in fact, may lead to additional problems. In my opinion, we're not really repealing, nor replacing, but trying to fix the original bill. How much further along would we be had the two parties worked together?

I suspect, that in the end, it'll be just as expensive and not much better than the current program.

[Cigar]

LOL, a troll is a troll is a troll.

Don't have a price ... ?

[Grizz]

Universal Healthcare does not have to be Single Payer.

No but that's where we're going. It's been the plan all along.

[Grizz]

Don't have a price ... ?
You aren't very good at this Ciggy.
Here maybe I can help, who sets the premiums for any of the plans?

[Don]

What I pay for a Car is already too high ... :laugh:

What Decade of Health Care Insurance are you trying to equal of go below?

Name that Year

1965. Before the federal government involved themselves into something they had no constitutional right to do. Their involvement that they incrementally ramped up till we find ourselves where we are today.

[Cigar]

1965. Before the federal government involved themselves into something they had no constitutional right to do. Their involvement that they incrementally ramped up till we find ourselves where we are today.

... and that number is?

[Trumpster]

Nancy Pelosi on the proposed ACA: "We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it."

Obama: If you like your health care plan you can keep it and if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor, period! And premiums will go down.

What we got with the ACA is a disaster, but Donald Trump and the Republicans in congress will be held to a higher standard, of course!

Personally, I hope they design something based on free-market principles.

[Grizz]

... and that number is?

You'll have to ask HHS, they have the final approval.

[birddog]

No but that's where we're going. It's been the plan all along.

That's what the libs want for sure, but I don't see it happening very soon.

[Cletus]

By David Leonhardt DEC. 27, 2016


Dear Mr. President-elect:

Your position on universal health insurance has been admirably clear. You support it. You did before you ran for president and continued to do so in the campaign.

In 2000, you wrote, “We must have universal healthcare.” In a Fox News debate last year, you said, “We have to take care of the people that can’t take care of themselves.” On “60 Minutes,” you said, “Everybody’s got to be covered.”

I am writing to you now because I am concerned that Republicans in Congress do not share your goal and are not giving you good advice on this issue. I’m worried that they are not acting in the best interests of your presidency or the country. I encourage you to be skeptical of them.

It is entirely possible for you to sign a conservative health care bill that lives up to your belief in universal coverage. It’s a bill that you could celebrate as a replacement of Obamacare. But it would be quite different from the bills that congressional Republicans are pushing...

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/27/opinion/a-letter-to-donald-trump-about-health-care.html?_r=0


Well, we know you didn't write the letter. There are no misspelled words in it.

[Trumpster]

There is no easy solution , nor any inexpensive one.

As I mentioned earlier, a healthcare system based on free-market principles would be best, in my opinion, but should include what people do for themselves to maintain good health. Doctors can't do it by themselves, it needs to be a cooperative effort - a doctor/patient partnership. The current healthcare system deserves poor grades, but what grades do we the people deserve when two thirds of Americans are overweight or obese? Healthcare begins with what we do for ourselves.

I agree with your statement that there's no easy solution, nor any inexpensive one. And, as you can see by my statements above, I think it's because we have failed to address the underlying cause - the very important part of healthcare that should include healthy behaviors or lifestyles. In 2015 the national healthcare bill was 3.2 trillion. At least half of that cost was self inflicted by unhealthy lifestyle/behaviors.

Are there any politicians addressing healthcare from this standpoint? No, because this kind of talk will not get any votes nor will it help to win any popularity contest.