Ever have an idea which, at least as you\u2019re thinking about it, seems so right a solution to a problem that you really, really want to somehow get the message to the Powers That Be?\u00a0 That\u2019s me tonight.<\/p>\n
(And sometimes when I\u2019m in this mood, I play the \u201cletter to your congressman\u201d game \u2014 but it doesn\u2019t work with a very Blue Democrat.) <\/p>\n
But I\u2019ve come to the conclusion that Republicans are approaching this issue all wrong.\u00a0 Now, for some of them, that\u2019s because they really don\u2019t care.\u00a0 The McCains who pull out the line of \u201cit\u2019s the law; they won and that\u2019s that.\u201d\u00a0 (Was that who it was?\u00a0 Anyway, there are some who either are perfectly happy with O\u2019Care or just don\u2019t care about healthcare in general one way or the other.)\u00a0 And then there are the ones with the approach of \u201cit\u2019s so bad, the only solution is to repeal it altogether.\u201d<\/p>\n
But ObamaCare was a monstrosity, a Rube Goldberg sort of legislation \u2014 pulling together a mechanism for buying coverage (the exchanges), a set of premium subsidies, a Medicaid expansion, regulations about what must be contained in a health benefits package, taxes which were intended to \u201cfund\u201d it (though everything goes into the same General Revenue pot rather than a separate \u201cObamaCare\u201d fund), any manner of other demonstration projects and \u201cbend the cost curve\u201d programs, etc.<\/p>\n
And maybe this means we stop thinking of it as one single coherent piece of legislation that has to be undone by one single repeal.<\/p>\n
So what if the House Republicans start small?\u00a0 What if their first demand, in the current budget negotiations, was to repeal the employer mandate, which, instead of motivating employers to begin offering health insurance, has had the effect of motivating them to reduce their employees\u2019 hours, and which many Dems also agree is a problem?<\/p>\n
Then \u2014 in baby steps \u2014 demand, in the next round of negotiations, demand the restoration of full age and sex-based actuarial pricing, so that 25-year-old men don\u2019t have to be guilted or tricked into subsidizing coverage for their elders (and, let\u2019s face it, for women).<\/p>\n
Other baby steps:<\/p>\n
(The individual mandate?\u00a0 No, that should be low priority \u2014 and it could easily be swapped out for a tax credit with the same effect \u2014 money that you lose out on without insurance.)<\/p>\n
Unfortunately, this requires legislators serious about fixing the health care system, such as it is, rather than\u00a0scoring political points.\u00a0 But I can dream, can\u2019t I?<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Ever have an idea which, at least as you\u2019re thinking about it, seems so right a solution to a problem that you really, really want to somehow get the message to the Powers That Be?\u00a0 That\u2019s me tonight. (And sometimes when I\u2019m in this mood, I play the \u201cletter to your congressman\u201d game \u2014 but […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2209,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-816","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"yoast_head":"\n