-
Farewell to the Spectator
December 16, 2011 | 8 comments
-
Tentative Praise for Ryan’s New Bipartisan Medicare Plan
December 15, 2011 | 3 comments
-
The Day Ahead: Thursday, December 15
December 15, 2011 | 0 comments
-
Examiner for Romney, National Review Against Gingrich
December 14, 2011 | 39 comments
-
Paul Ryan to Introduce New Medicare Plan with Democrat Ron Wyden
December 14, 2011 | 4 comments
The Spectacle Blog
In a summary of Rep. Paul Ryan’s plan for replacing Obamacare, Avik Roy notes that Ryan and co. are hesitant to advertise the fact that his measure would provide universal coverage for health care insurance.
One thing that’s interesting about Paul Ryan’s speech — and it’s been true of every similar Republican speech on the topic — is that the words “universal coverage” are never uttered. Former CBO Douglas Holtz-Eakin, another proponent of the tax-credit approach, also takes care to distinguish it from “an immediate move to universal coverage or other massive expansion.”
But facts are facts, and the universal tax credit approach to health care reform is indeed a plan for universal coverage. I get that some Republicans recoil from the term, because it smacks to them of socialism, but it’s high time to reclaim the words “universal coverage” from the socialists.
Universal coverage is a worthy goal that, done the right way, would dramatically improve our fiscal situation, help control runaway health-care costs, lift a massive drag from the U.S. economy, and make a lasting humanitarian contribution. A Republican politician who campaigned on that platform could fire the imaginations of millions.
Because Ryan’s plan is to replace the tax preference for employer-provided health insurance with a refundable tax credit available to everyone, his plan would provide for universal coverage, which even Obamacare won’t achieve, if it’s left in place.
If Ryan were proposing a new system of bureacracy along the lines of Obamacare, it would be suspicious for him to boast about universal coverage. But what he’s suggesting is merely a reform of the tax code. The employer-provided health insurance benefit is already universal, it’s just terribly inefficient. If Ryan were able to explain that his plan for universal coverage is really just tax reform, then there would be no problem with the term.
View all comments (10) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Joseph Lawler
http://spectator.org/blog/2011/09/28/republicans-for-universal-cove
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Ailes: A Voice for the Silent Majority
- Of Wizards and Weapons
- Public Nuisances
The Spectacle Blog
The #FreeKate Narrative Melts Down: Lies Exposed in Florida Teen Sex Case
Robert Stacy McCain | 5.25.13
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
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
M.C.H.| 9.28.11 @ 2:58PM
But facts are facts, and the universal tax credit approach to health care reform is indeed a plan for universal coverage.
A tax credit doesn't equal universal coverage. Insurance companies won't necessarily offer coverage to everyone at the tax credit price. The portability part is a good idea but it's an exaggeration to call it universal coverage.
Universal coverage is a worthy goal that, done the right way, would dramatically improve our fiscal situation, help control runaway health-care costs, lift a massive drag from the U.S. economy, and make a lasting humanitarian contribution. A Republican politician who campaigned on that platform could fire the imaginations of millions.
A Republican who ran on a platform of Universal Coverage of any kind would be Tea Partied out of the race in no time.
Greg| 9.28.11 @ 4:58PM
It's not his money. It's not the government's money. The tax code is not an engine for social change; the tax code should have but one purpose: generating money for the treasury.
The GOP is headed down a dangerous path. Once we accept that there is room in the tax code to tell me how to spend my money (i.e., Paul Ryan will knock off $100 from my tax bill... if I buy a health insurance policy), then there's absolutely no barrier to what government can mandate.
For example: what's to stop Paul Ryan from taxing me at 100% of all my income? Why couldn't he tell me that he'll refund about 64% of my income if I agree to eat four servings of leafy green veggies, buy a Prius, go to a weekly health and wellness meeting, etc., etc., etc.?
Michele Bachmann is right on this front: we have to get rid of the mindset that a citizen's money is the government's money, and the only question is how much the rat-faced bureaucrats allow me to keep each year.
martin j smith| 9.28.11 @ 4:59PM
A tax credit system is not Obamacare. What about this: Those who can pay cash for medical care can do so those that need the tax credit can get it. In any event you chose your own health care based on what you can afford to buy.
This is no one size fits all--and in Obama care.
By the way I am not an economist-of medical care or otherwise I am just giving an oppinion so sue me.
Occam's Tool| 9.28.11 @ 7:08PM
Al the tax credit system would do is put the self employed on a level playing field with a State employee. No mandate.
Tibberton| 9.28.11 @ 7:40PM
How does it level the playing field with state employees? State employees generally have group coverage of some sort, and don't have the sort of portability the Ryan plan tries to provide nor the ability to go out and buy their own private insurance from any provider they want.
On the other hand, under the Ryan plan you aren't guaranteed to find coverage that the tax credit would pay for. That's bad, compared to being a state employee in a group plan. But if you can you gain portability, so long as you can continue to afford the premiums. That's good. The company could, of course, go out of business in which case you and your pre-existing conditions, if any, have to go shopping for coverage again. That's bad.
You're right, of course, that the Ryan plan doesn't include a mandate. It's not universal coverage, and if you decide not to buy insurance or can't afford it with the tax credit then you may just be SOL.
Chuck| 9.28.11 @ 7:26PM
A former southern governor once said there was not a "dime's worth of difference" between the two parties. Universal converage means government control now under Democrats eventually under Republicans except Romney, past tense, already is.
Bob K.| 9.29.11 @ 8:13AM
On the other hand Mandatory Tax Reform has a good ring to it!
guthriej| 9.29.11 @ 7:59PM
Private health insurance can be affordable provided two conditions are met: Purchasers can shop nationally, which means getting rid of all State commissions and their mandates, e.g. sex-change operations, and guarantees portability; and there are large deductibles, supported by tax-free savings accounts, which brings down premiums (a 10K deductible provides for disaster insurance).
yisong| 10.26.11 @ 9:56PM
Slewing ring bearings support extreme axial, radial, and tilting moment loading in a single bearing unit. http://www.1stbearing.com