Donald Trump has decided that he cannot wait for Congress and will now reform Obamacare by executive order. Before anyone complains, if you live by the executive order, you die by the executive order. This will be as applicable to Trump as it is for Obama. So some of the key priorities appear to be to allow policies that do not conform to the current "minimum requirements" and to allow associations to purchase policies across state lines, all of which would result in substantially lower premiums. This executive order is not highly detailed, so the specifics will have to be worked out through the regulatory process, but the broad directives are pretty clear. Obamacare is being gutted and president Trump is directing that more consumer friendly, less costly alternatives be provided to replace it.
Seems like something is being done to say something is being done. Will need more details but it seems like we are merely going back to the pre-ACA.
I have not seen the press conference, but Rand Paul has apparently endorsed this approach and was there to support the announcement of it. Having Rand Paul on board is a big win for President Trump. Rand Paul oftentimes reminds me of "Mikey" in the old Life cereal commercials ("Give it to Mikey, he hates everything"). It sometimes seems like Rand Paul is against almost everything. But he likes this, eh? That will certainly peak the interest of tens of millions of otherwise skeptical Americans.
This could be nothing but for show, or it could blow up the ACA markets. It all seems to depends on how many small businesses band together to buy into these Association plans which is the way they are working around buying accross state lines. Buying accross state lines is one of those things that sounds great on the surface, but in this case it’s designed to take people (likely healthier, or more willing to risk) out of the ACA markets. Which goes against the idea of how stable insurance markets work to get as many people in as you can and the healthy people pay for the unhealthy people, or with car insurance, the good drivers pay for the bad or unlucky drivers. Pretty basic stuff but it all seems to depend on how many businesses join these association plans. I guess the main question is, can ACA survive another 3 years of Trump and the GOP openly trying to sabotage ACA? If it does survive, that’s one hell of a bill Obama put into place. Why Trump can’t just do what’s right for the American people and say “ACA sucks and I want to replace it, but for now I’ll work with Dems to insure it still runs properly” is beyond me. Openly sabotaging it will kill him politically unless Americans continue to be politically ignorant.
You haven't been following. The idea was from Rand Paul. The no-one-link-including-Congress congressional health care plan wasn't evil enough for Rand Paul as it's not a full repeal of Obamacare. Of course he support something that has a chance to kill it.
So... after years of complaining about Obama and executive orders, you now support the use, when they achieve the results you support. btw, ACA was not an executive order. But after Trump failed to work with congress to achieve his desired result, he now resorts to executive order to to cripple ACA, weaken health care coverage for millions of Americans to the benefit of the wealthy and insurance companies.
So... after years of supporting Obama and his executive orders, you now complain about their use, when they achieve results that you do not support. Gotcha.
You're engaging in the exact behavior that you're criticizing. You undoubtedly b****ed about Obama's executive orders, I guarantee you it would be easy to go through your posting history and find you doing so, yet executive orders issued by Trump are perfectly okay to you now. You're a hypocrite of the highest order.
The funny thing about buying across state line is some States allow that. No insurer opt for it because they all realized that the cost of health care are all local, not in so far away state. They have spent years building up network of providers to reduce cost. The buying across the state line is a cool political line but is so outdated and junk. This association is different as it can be all in-state and where it does have an impact is it ability to not follow the same protection and thus can offer anything from junk/scan insurance to basic insurance. If that take off, it will raise premium for the folks that aren't as healthy (pre-existing condition) or young (older people) and kill Obamacare. Overall, we get a more fractured health care system that is yet more inefficient and costly.
Trump's executive order at this point appears to be a broad directive to implement the changes that he is directing through the existing regulatory process. He is working within the legal framework of the existing Obamacare law, much of which was developed and implemented through this same regulatory process after the initial law was passed. He is just directing that the regulations be changed. There is nothing sacrosanct about the regulations passed during the previous administration. Obama's regulatory directives are not some sort of immutable holy writ which can never be changed. What needs to go through Congress on this? Legally speaking, Trump is directing that the Obamacare regulations be updated, that's all. So no new legislation is needed. The problem with executive orders under Obama came when he directed that laws be overlooked or circumvented, or that new laws effectively be recognized that had no legislative basis. These actions by Trump do have a legislative basis and that basis is the ACA.
Touchdown Trump! Touchdown! GOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAALLLLLL!!!!!! GOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAALLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! TRUMP!!!!!TRUMP!!!!!TRUMP!!!!!TRUMP!!!!!TRUMP!!!!!TRUMP!!!!!
They should have a 3-way IQ contest: Trump, Tillerson and Rand Paul. I think I know who would lose that .....
I mean, isn't issuing an executive order that allows for the availability of cheaper plans that offer skeleton coverage the very definition of trying to circumvent existing law? On top of that, I'm curious how allowing for such plans is considered consumer-friendly? If I'm paying for insurance that doesn't cover essential health benefits or prescription drugs, what the hell good is that doing me? I might as well not even have insurance at that point, which I'm guessing is the ultimate goal here anyways.
No. The definition of the minimum requirements is not specified in the law, it was arrived at through the regulatory process. Many Americans find this sort of comprehensive coverage unnecessary and way too expensive. It is not in compliance with the Democrat left's ideas of what is "politically correct" for them to feel that way, but the prices have spiraled far out of control and people cannot afford to finance this leftist fantasy anymore. As far as your notions of what constitutes "essential benefits," Trump's proposed changes will not stop you from obtaining a policy that has all of that, if you are willing to pay for it. But just because you regard that level of benefits as "essential," it does not follow that they are for everyone, or that everyone should be required to have that regardless of whether they want it or can afford it or not. This is a major point where the Democrats got it wrong in the initial legislation. Anyway, I do not know what all of this will eventually all look like. In fact, nobody does. But this part about making more cheaper more bare-bones insurance plans available to people who believe that is all they need appears to be the right way to go here. In fact, it will be effectively impossible to start reigning in healthcare costs without allowing for this kind of consumer flexibility. On this point, Trump appears to be on the right track.
My biggest gripe with the GOP is the hypocrisy after their complaints about Obama and the Democrats. They are doing the same thing. We need bipartisan action
