Monday, March 06, 2017

Obamacare 2.0 waffles into TrumpCare with little ideological accomplishment on anti-selection

Here’s a good explanation of the GOP draft of the Obamacare rework, by Sarah Kiff on Vox, link.

The main concept in dealing with the pre-existing condition problem is “continuous coverage”.  But older people are likely to be charged more than under Obamacare.

Also premium support supplements are largely replaced by tax credits.  For this idea to work for poor people, they would have to be given the money (almost like UBI).  The tax credits tend to be less than the support. If they are true tax credits, then it won't matter if people itemize or not, but we have to watch that.

Young adults pay less, older people pay more.  This may help young adults with student loan problems.   Trump does seem to be determined to cover someone like Connor Golden, who lost a leg to an explosion in Central Park properly.

Ezra Klein writes that the bill is a solution looking for a problem, or is a “compromise of a compromise …”.

The Washington Post calls the new proposal "reckless and heartless".

Here's the text of "The American Health Care Act", from Fox, of course.

Update: March 11

Julia Belluz of Vox explains how the "continuous coverage" concept in the GOP plan can fail people with long term medical conditions and job breaks.  I also wonder what happens if the insurer leaves Obamacare;  does the person have to find a new provider within 63 days?

March 13

The CBO says that 24 million people would keep coverage under the American Health Care Act/  Another issue is that consumers cannot comparison-shop for healthcare or know the prices when critically ill (although they could compare-shop for plans if there was enough competition).

March 14

Today, at a WH Press Briefing.  Sean Spicer made a point that Obamacare burdened a lot of people for making them buy coverage they didn't need (making 55 years olds cover other people's pregnancies); so it's about more than just pre-existing conditions.

No comments: