Skip to main content

View Diary: Answer to anti-Obamacare decision? Medicare for all (171 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I'm not so sure. (14+ / 0-)

    If the mandate is struck down and the rest of the bill is left in place, there is going to be a mob of angry insurance CEOs with pitchforks rallying on the DC mall.  The Republicans listen to those guys.  Something will need to be done.  

    To me, the most interesting part of this is that they could enact a very limited Medicare buy-in, similar to the public option, and then offer the private plans as an opt-out, like school vouchers.

    I do not think the Supreme Court is ready to declare Medicare unconstitutional, and I don't really see how they can declare a public program with a private opt-out unconstitutional either.    

    In the rest of the developed world consumption is taxed to pay for education and health care, in the United States, health care and education are taxed to pay for consumption. Stirling Newberry

    by albrt on Wed Jun 27, 2012 at 11:06:35 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  replace "mandate" with restricted buy-in (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      elwior, ColoTim

      I agree, that if the mandate is struck down, but the rest is left in place, health insurance companies would go broke. Boo frigging hoo, but yes, the CEO will bring out the pitchforks.

      You could easily replace the mandate with something more along the lines of a restricted time where you can purchase insurance... like only the first week of the new year.

      You'd give people strong pressure to buy insurance, but it wouldn't be a mandate. Republicans might be OK with that: as long at they can save face and claim credit from saving the republic from the evils of the mandate, there's a slight chance.

      •  Health Insurance (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        elwior, George Hier, bwintx

        companies will not go broke they will just creative account their way around the 85% (or whatever the exact figure is) that must be spent on actual healthcare.

        If this was done in good faith we'd be talking about smaller copays and deductibles being used as tools to make the industry behave.

        •  What happens to the people who don't buy ins when (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ybruti

          they get sick? Who pays? It's all of us but mainly those of us who have ins. It's our rates that will go up because the hospitals and doctors will charge ins com more and they will pass it on to us.

          If pre-existing conditions must be covered and there is no mandate, then there's really no reason for anyone to buy ins until they are sick. Ins companies need a pool of healthy people in order to pay out the claims of the unhealthy. It would be like buying fire insurance to cover your house that has already burned down.

          Ben Franklin developed the first fire insurance idea in Philadelphia. To pay for a fire brigade, home owners would buy into it and they were given a medallion to put on their homes to identify paid members. There are still homes in center city Philly that have those medallions affixed to the front of their house.

          Progressives will win only when we convince a majority that they, too, are Progressive. And... It’s the Supreme Court, stupid!

          by auapplemac on Wed Jun 27, 2012 at 01:39:03 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Insurance doesn't have to be sold monthly (0+ / 0-)

            Policy #12398654

            Customer hereby agrees to pay $50,000 for health insurance for the years 2012, 2015, 2018, 2021, 2024, 2027, and such other triped year or fraction thereof for which funds from this policy selling year shall be available to pay claims.

            Customer may pay $500/month for the months in the year 2012 and in succeeding years an amount typically charged in the market for the customer's age and state of residence.

            In the event of the customer's demise, the balance due on the $50,000 shall be accelerated and due in full and promptly payable by his/her estate.

      •  Good way to kill people! (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        George Hier
        You could easily replace the mandate with something more along the lines of a restricted time where you can purchase insurance... like only the first week of the new year.
        Well, that would pretty much suck for someone who got sick or injured in February...

        --- Keep Christian mythology out of science class!

        by cybersaur on Wed Jun 27, 2012 at 01:18:50 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Insurance costs would skyrocket! N/t (0+ / 0-)

        Are you a Green who has difficulty telling Democrats and Republicans apart? Well, I have difficulty telling Greens and Maoists apart.

        by Subversive on Wed Jun 27, 2012 at 01:41:25 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Give people vouchers (0+ / 0-)

        The GOP is fond of them, well, this is one place they might be useful.

        This voucher is good for one year of the approved insurance coverage. That coverage has to include all the things that were argued over - limits on your out of pocket costs, no limits on cost for the insurer, preventative care at no cost, no pre-existing conditions, etc.

        Presto! No constitutional problems. Your taxes provide you with a service. You pick what insurer from among the approved vendors.

        Basically the same as if you were a govt employee. And it's up to Congress to wrangle over how much that's going to cost.

    •  No (7+ / 0-)

      The insurance companies will find a way to pull a win out of this no matter what happens.

    •  Good point, stands to reason then that they would (0+ / 0-)

      strike the whole thing down. They will make whatever decision is best for the millionaires and the Republican Party.

      24/7, it's all 'Great news for Romney!'

      by doinaheckuvanutjob on Thu Jun 28, 2012 at 12:11:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site