-
Adieu, Adieu, Remember Me
March 25, 2011 | 38 comments
-
DeMint’s Defense of RomneyCare is Ignorant…And Dangerous
March 17, 2011 | 85 comments
-
McConnell Pushing Vote to Block the EPA from Regulating Carbon Emissions
March 17, 2011 | 9 comments
-
More Barbour on Afghanistan
March 16, 2011 | 8 comments
-
House Passes Three Week Spending Bill
March 15, 2011 | 8 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Eric Cantor’s office spent the day beating back a story in the Hill, which initially reported that the Republican whip favored preserving certain provisions of ObamaCare. The Hill later updated and corrected the item, though the current version still has Cantor speaking about covering younger Americans and those with pre-existing conditions.
Cantor spokesman Brad Dayspring dismissed the story, and said that the Virginia Republican favors the full repeal of ObamaCare, and replacing it with a Republican alternative. When asked about the alternative, Dayspring pointed me toward this legislation House Republicans introduced earlier in the year, which he said is representative of the GOP approach to issues such as covering those with pre-existing conditions.
Overall, the GOP plan was not very ambitious and is not a true free market alternative. It does allow Americans to purchase insurance accross state lines, but it doesn’t remove one of the biggest barriers to the creation of a free market for health care, which is a tax code that discriminates against those who purchase insurance on their own instead of through an employer. Nor does it include any significant changes to Medicare and Medicaid.
While stopping short of forcing insurers to cover those with pre-existing conditions, the plan would force states to set up “qualifying” federally-subsidized high risk pools or reinsurance programs. It would also make dependents out of everybody through the age of 25, so younger Americans can stay on their parents policies longer. Under ObamaCare, the age is 26.
By all means, the first order of business for conservatives is finding a way to repeal ObamaCare. But winning the health care debate in the long-run will require much bolder solutions than Republican leadership has embraced thus far.
View all comments (9) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Philip Klein
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/11/30/cantor-and-obamacare-repeal
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Curly Smith| 11.30.10 @ 5:20PM
It isn't about forcing insurers to cover those with pre-existing conditions since they can already buy such insurance, it's about forcing insurers to insure those with pre-existing conditions at the same rate as they would those without the conditions, thereby forcing the healthy to further subsidize the unhealthy.
Let's suppose a healthy patient has 90% probability of spending $1000 and a 10% probability of spending $100,000 on health care. Ignoring profit and other costs, the premium would be $10,900. Now suppose it's an unhealthy patient with a 90% probability of spending $10,000 and the same 10% of $100,000; that premium would be $19,000. What Cantor is suggesting is that both the healthy and unhealthy pay a premium of $14,950 because "the pool" now has a 90% probability of spending $5,500. Under Cantor's scenario the healthy have every reason to drop their coverage because they can buy insurance during the ambulance ride.
shoey| 11.30.10 @ 6:10PM
excellent point Curly.
what it comes down to is that insurance companies must be allowed to manage their own risk, if that power is taken from them they are no longer insurance companies but a quasi-governmental welfare agency.
Occam's Tool| 11.30.10 @ 10:15PM
ObamaCare was designed to further enrich the plaintiff attorneys. Obamacare Delenda Est!
Richard L.| 11.30.10 @ 11:09PM
Cantor is a phony conservative. He still is buying votes with tax money extorted from the citizens. None of the GOP leaders deserve to be in power. What kind of fools are we to believe these rapacious pirates who stabbed us in the back from 2001 to 2006 have changed into born again republicans.
If the GOP leadership isn't beheaded by the incoming conservatives then this party should die so our freedoms can rebound.
martin j smith| 12.1.10 @ 8:00AM
Voters did not vote FOR the REPUBLICAN PARTY, that is what has to be absorbed. The voted AGAINST BIG GOVERNMENT and BIG SPENDING> We are still in a LAME DUCK MODE. Once the new class comes in, let the battle begin!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
wodiej| 12.1.10 @ 8:25AM
Pre-existing conditions should be covered under a one time deal. When a person becomes employed, they have 30 days to sign up for health insurance coverage. If they waive it, no future coverage for a pre-existing condition.
Everyone has to be held accountable for their own health. Many people eat too much, drink too much, smoke too much, eat crappy food and don't exercise enough. People should be given a full run of basic tests for cholesterol, diabetes, high blood pressure, BMI etc. when signing up for insurance. If any are in the unhealthy range, higher premiums until it is under control.
Insurance companies cannot stay in business if people are allowed to grab a policy only when they get sick.
People on public assistance should have more oversight on getting to work and taking care of themselves.
matthew s harrison| 12.1.10 @ 11:25AM
HIPPA took care of this stuff. Americans have a PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY to pay for their own insurance. Now, HIPPA forced insurers to cover someone who changed insurance carriers mid-stream, regardless of their health. That said, the rest is minutia, and is about one thing and one thing only-CONTROLLING THE MASSES.
If someone spends every penny they make, and don't save for the unforeseen, because they have to have 9 flat screen televisions and a caddillac, then it is their problem if they can't get insured. It is not the problem of the rest of us-we already insure those who refuse to work-now we have to insure those who refuse to plan for anything other than what new motorcycle they are going to buy?
Please-Cantor is like all the other politicians. He understands that if the G controls us, they can get away with murder.
HIPPA can be modified a little bit-but otherwise-nothing whatsoever needs to be done. If someone is currently insured and they lose their job, they are guaranteed insurance through any other insurer of their choice. There is no other need to force any other crap.
It would be nice if they had more affordable COBRA costs, which is how most people get in the trick bag of "pre-existing" conditions, but otherwise, don't change a thing.
All of these changes are guaranteeing that eugenics, either planned or incidental, will exist more than it does now.
These politicians, who get lots of money from insurers, forget withing seconds of cashing those checks, those insurance companies are not GSE's and thus have fiduciary responsibility to their investors and/or stock holders to turn a profit. They don't, they lose market capital, and they go under.....which at the end of the day is the goal of the democrats, and specifically barry soetoro.
LK| 12.1.10 @ 11:59AM
When Rush reported Cantor's comments on his program yesterday I felt like I'd been punched in the stomach. Just another disappointment. Obviously Cantor's not the leader that will return us to Constitutional government. Not to dispair, there is still Bobby Jindal, and Michelle Bachman.
Repeal legislation authorizing Nixon's EPA, and Carter's Dept. of Education. Defund all federal regulatory activity not specifically authorized by the Constitution. Sell off most land currently owned by the feds to pay down our massive debt. Take the regulatory chains off of business, and make the USA once again the place where its citizens make things and produce wealth. Get out of the UN, and send them packing. Sorry got a little carried away. Well Santa, that's my list.
Semper Fi
Leon from Redding CA| 12.1.10 @ 5:43PM
When you state, "but it doesn't remove one of the biggest barriers to the creation of a free market for health care, which is a tax code that discriminates against those who purchase insurance on their own instead of through an employer", this is not completely accurate. The tax code does allow individuals to purchase health insurance with pre-tax dollars. A group called LyfeBank have figured out the way to do this within the tax code.