Home | About | Donate

CBO: Trump's Plan to Sabotage ACA Would Skyrocket Premiums


#1

CBO: Trump's Plan to Sabotage ACA Would Skyrocket Premiums

Julia Conley, staff writer

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) said Tuesday that premiums for many Americans would go up by 20 percent in 2018, should President Donald Trump follow through on his threats to stop paying the Affordable Care Act's cost-sharing subsidies to insurance companies.


#2

Alt right, alt fact, alt reality, faked president… C’mon leaders call it for what it is. The resulting disaster of an arcane voting system. The Russians didn’t do this we have been walking into this mess for decades. Can’t reason prevail? The forces of evil will overtake us. It has already corrupted the Dems. with their super delegate scheme and turned the Republicans into the party of jack booted thugs.


#3

This “man” is a greater threat to health than CANCER.


#4

Another Enlightened One!

Thank you for your comment Lerenarde.


#5

Premiums previously soared under ACA, which has limited coverage, and LARGE co-pays and deductibles. We should be clear that subsidies were simply passed through the insured to private insurance companies. They’re simply yelling about since the faucet may be turned down for awhile. It’s been hellish for sick and will become more hellish.

The only solutions is 100% coverage of all things medical with no deductibles and co-pays because HEALTHCARE IS A HUMAN RIGHT.

MEDICARE FOR ALL NOW!!!


#6

That is a little disingenuous, Medicare For All is government financed managed care. If Medicare had been fully funded for the last 30 years (maybe you didn’t notice that healthcare wasn’t a priority taxes were) you wouldn’t have the privatized managed care with all the impediments to healthcare that has already been paid for. Nor have you explained how exactly we will pay for it. Health Care is a Human Right but this is not the only way.


#7

It’s not the least bit disingenuous. The Conyers/Sanders (hopefully) billl calls for 100% coverage w/ no copays, deductibles and includes drugs, dental, eye and mental fully-covered. It can easily be pid for with a progressive, graduted Medicare tax and the total costs would be about 1/3 less than current costs, the highest in the “developed” world. The problem is political, not financial.


#8

Perhaps you can share with the rest of us some examples of where vast Federal bureaucracies have done other great things and cut costs by two thirds.

That would be very helpful and give the rest of us ammunition to use in the great march forward.


#9

So there is a CBO report on the financials? I ask because claims made for HR 676 just don’t add up.


#10

The only other comparable example in the U.S. is Social Security, which is extremely efficient and by uncapping the SS tax and making its tax structure more progressive, it would provide a truly livable and comfortable retirement for every U.S. citizen.

As for the efficiency of large organizations, can you name a single private health insurer that does not have a large bureaucracy, does not massively waste billions of dollars and actually provides full coverage/ Just askin’.


#11

This aint CBO, these are real numbers, fully sourced put together by an organization that has been wrestling with all aspects of single payer in the U.S.

http://www.pnhp.org/sites/default/files/Funding%20HR%20676_Friedman_7.31.13_proofed.pdf


#12

Yes, those are real numbers alright in a special interest sort of way. At least it is up front about the real intentions of HR 676 which is a bait and switch designed to de-fund the national health mandate from a benefit to a contribution level . I will wait for the CBO. Thanks.


#13

That’s simply untrue. The benefits are quite clearly stated. Paying for those benefits is clearly stated - through cost savings and taxes rather than premiums – and this paper clearly delineates the savings and presents a truly progressive tax package. Costs less, does more. That’s the gist of it. And if you think the CBO is neutral, you’re a bit off on that too. It’s a government agency subject to all kinds of political forces including the Congress which funds and oversees it. And the rich and corporations that own the Congress.


#14

I beg to differ. That is exactly what it is. It is even disingenuous to call it Medicare because as it states will be replaced. The benefits are not clearly stated or defined and are based on budgets not needs. Yes, I agree there are great savings in some areas that could be achieved in any number of ways with out wiping out federal entitlement and legal protection. Note your criticism of the CBO is the same people that will oversee HR676. And PnPh is not a neutral entity.


#15

Well, it’s actually not that bad if you run the numbers. Currently we pay about $10k per capita. 30% less would be about $7k. Quick math shows everyone’s taxes will go up by about 25%. Considering that half of us pay zilch in fed taxes, 25% of nada is nada so yeah, i can see how that is appealing.

Also, going back to the article “The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) said Tuesday that premiums for many Americans would go up by 20 percent in 2018”, welcome to the club, my insurance has been going up every year by 25% since the ACA was passed. Not sure why everyone is surprised, someone has to pay the premiums for those who cannot afford them.


#16

The Congressional Budget Office did come out with a report that stated that Trumpcare would raise costs by 750 percent and leave 23 million Americans uncovered. One poll showed Trump at just 17 percent support for the repeal of Obamacare and at 17 percent support on Trumpcare. In short, this ha been a disaster for Trump, who in the latest polls has 34 percent support with 61 percent non support. If he wants to skyrocket premiums he is going to drop lower in the support and higher in the non support. In short, his efforts in public health care have been a total disaster. He is most likely going to get a backlash in the next two elections in 2018 and 2020. I think I see mainstream Republicans not wanting to get backlashed along with Trump and distancing themselves from him now.


#17

The Congressional Budget Office did indeed issue a report that clearly stated that Trumpcare would increase costs by 750 percent and 23 million Americans would not be covered. I remember one news story about the time period congress congress was considering Trumpcare and there being on the average 8 lobbyists for every single legislator. Legislators were being bribed to pass Trumpcare with the huge increase to boost corporate profits. The result should really be called Corporatecare because they got the profits increase that they wanted.


#18

Your premiums go up because the the tax contributions to medicare haven’t increased since 1985. Medicaid pays for premiums that are beyond reach for people eligible to receive medicare benefits but cannot afford it.