[blind-democracy] Republican snake oil: Bad medicine in the making

  • From: "Roger Loran Bailey" <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
  • To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 10:04:02 -0400

https://socialistaction.org/2017/03/14/republican-snake-oil-bad-medicine-in-the-making/


Republican snake oil: Bad medicine in the making

/ 2 days ago


Health Forum

By JOE AUCIELLO

With the election of Donald Trump as president, the Republican initiative to dismantle the Affordable Care Act (ACA), or “Obamacare,” begins in earnest and with real traction, following several years of consistent but failed attempts that were merely symbolic. Now, the right-wing rhetoric is shaping into reality.

In February, President Trump met with state governors and health-care executives to begin to outline the initial framework of a long-promised but still- developing plan that would “save America from Obamacare.” It was a step towards the fulfillment of a major campaign promise and a pledge that was repeated in the new president’s first speech to Congress to “repeal and replace” the Affordable Care Act.

That Americans deserve and need better than what Obamacare has offered is hardly in doubt. That President Trump and his business buddies will provide better is definitely in doubt. In fact, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Republican-replacement plan is intended to provide less coverage to fewer people at higher cost—and with higher corporate profits—despite claims to the contrary from GOP leaders.

As of this writing, Republicans are sparring among themselves to determine the overall framework of their plan. In practical terms, this means a tug-of-war that will decide just how little health care will be offered, who will pay for it, and at what extra price.

Nonetheless, with any of the Republican health plans, millions of Americans will spend more for less. One key feature of the replacement plan is that obtaining health insurance will no longer be a requirement, as it was under the ACA. Instead, insurance companies will be able to charge up to 30% higher premiums for anyone who drops health coverage for even two months and then re-enrolls. Workers who lose a job or who are forced to take part-time hours instead of full-time are likely, therefore, to face increasing hardship or may lose health care entirely.

Other provisions of the replacement plan are equally harsh. The ACA income-based subsidies will be replaced by tax credits based on age, instead of financial need. The old and poor, who are likely to have the greatest need, will be less likely to afford insurance.

Federal funding to states that increase Medicaid coverage will be phased out under the House plan. States will be able to deny Medicaid coverage to the unemployed.

On these essential points, Republicans agree. Their only conflict is over how to achieve them.

Whatever bill emerges from the Republican-dominated Congress, there are few positive outcomes for workers, the poor, and elderly. Recent estimates from the Brookings Institution stated that approximately 15 million people would be without health insurance as a result, and congressional budget analysts estimated that 24 million people would lose coverage by 2026.

If the Republican health-care package has little to offer, as appears likely, then clever politicians must try to divert public attention from its actual contents and point instead to its tinsel and wrapping.

In fact, the first signs of the emerging Trump plan indicate the likelihood of increased hardship for millions—all in the name of liberty and freedom to choose. Florida Republican Dennis Ross commented, “Not everybody is going to have health care—some people just don’t care enough about their own care.”

Would a lack of income sufficient to afford medical insurance have anything to do with this supposed lack of interest in one’s own well-being? The Republican representative does not believe the question is even worth asking. Apparently, there’s not much that can be done for these “some people” because “whether they take it [health insurance] or not is like trying to legislate responsibility” (Cape Cod Times, Feb. 25, 2017).

Of course, Rep. Ross ignores the obvious fact that legislating responsibility is a legitimate and necessary role of government, whether it involves seat-belt laws, legal drinking age, etc.

Other Republican legislators, some more media-savvy than Rep. Ross, try to put a more positive spin on the hardships that Congress is preparing for the public. “We’re not going to send an IRS agent out to chase you down and make you buy health insurance,” said Rep. Michael Burgess of Texas. “If the numbers drop, I would say that’s a good thing, because we’ve restored personal liberty in this country.”

The numbers that the representative refers to are the number of people who will have health insurance. Those who lack the means to obtain health care would have to find comfort in their “personal liberty” to get sick, to suffer an injury, etc.

When Republican politicians reach for concepts like “liberty,” and “choice,” it is well to reply, “Liberty for whom? Choice to do what?” Typically, the answer involves the well-being of pharmaceutical companies and insurance corporations and their freedom to earn obscene amounts of money. Your choice means their profits.

And let’s not forget how well their executives are paid, in salaries and benefits totaling more than $20 million per CEO. One good source for such information is the following: http://www.aflcio.org/Corporate-Watch/Paywatch-2014/100-Highest-Paid-CEOs.

All of the health-care plans and proposals emanating from the Washington-Wall Street nexus, from ACA/Obamacare to the Republican plan, suffer from the same fatal flaw. They are all intended, in the first place, to create exorbitant corporate profits, and, in the second place, to provide some measure of “good medicine.” These two goals—money and health—are inevitably in conflict.

Capitalist America places the greater value on the health of business rather than on the health of people. The latter is simply a by-product of the former.

What should be on the public agenda now is a serious discussion about proposals for national health care and single-payer plans. This sentiment was brought forward repeatedly in speeches and interviews at the annual convention of Students for a National Health Program, meeting this month in Philadelphia. Matthew Moy, a fellow at the American Medical Student Association, told the Philadelphia Inquirer at the gathering, “When you believe that health care is a human right, the only way to adequately and efficiently provide that for everybody is through a single-payer system, which won’t waste money with a middleman insurance company telling you where you need to go.”

Americans will need to see through the right-wing fog of rhetoric in order to go beyond the Republican plan, beyond Obamacare, and towards a universal health-care system with access for all.

Photo: Toby Talbot / AP















a








Share this:

Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
17Share on Facebook (Opens in new window)17
Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window)


March 14, 2017 in Health care, Trump / U.S. Government.


Related posts





Which way forward for women in 2017?





Protests score Trump’s hate-mongering agenda





Presidential Debate: Where are the women?


Post navigation

← Chicago Teachers Union hosts International Women’s Day Protest
















Get Involved!
Donate to help support our work
Get email updates
Join Socialist Action


Newspaper Archives
Newspaper Archives Select Month March 2017 (6) February 2017 (19) January 2017 (13) December 2016 (12) November 2016 (19) October 2016 (12) September 2016 (10) August 2016 (10) July 2016 (14) June 2016 (14) May 2016 (9) April 2016 (12) March 2016 (14) February 2016 (8) January 2016 (11) December 2015 (11) November 2015 (9) October 2015 (8) September 2015 (10) August 2015 (7) July 2015 (13) June 2015 (9) May 2015 (10) April 2015 (12) March 2015 (9) February 2015 (11) January 2015 (10) December 2014 (12) November 2014 (11) October 2014 (9) September 2014 (6) August 2014 (10) July 2014 (11) June 2014 (10) May 2014 (11) April 2014 (10) March 2014 (9) February 2014 (11) January 2014 (11) December 2013 (10) November 2013 (11) October 2013 (17) September 2013 (13) August 2013 (10) July 2013 (11) June 2013 (15) May 2013 (14) April 2013 (14) March 2013 (12) February 2013 (10) January 2013 (17) December 2012 (7) November 2012 (8) October 2012 (19) September 2012 (2) August 2012 (27) July 2012 (18) June 2012 (3) May 2012 (19) April 2012 (14) March 2012 (17) February 2012 (19) January 2012 (17) December 2011 (3) November 2011 (33) October 2011 (14) September 2011 (13) August 2011 (34) July 2011 (24) June 2011 (19) May 2011 (19) April 2011 (15) March 2011 (15) February 2011 (16) January 2011 (15) December 2010 (17) November 2010 (1) October 2010 (6) September 2010 (3) August 2010 (8) July 2010 (7) June 2010 (2) May 2010 (9) April 2010 (3) March 2010 (8) February 2010 (3) January 2010 (9) December 2009 (6) November 2009 (5) October 2009 (16) September 2009 (3) August 2009 (2) July 2009 (5) June 2009 (2) May 2009 (7) April 2009 (6) March 2009 (16) February 2009 (9) January 2009 (10) December 2008 (11) November 2008 (8) October 2008 (16) September 2008 (14) August 2008 (18) July 2008 (12) June 2008 (3) May 2008 (2) April 2008 (3) March 2008 (14) February 2008 (11) January 2008 (11) December 2007 (8) November 2007 (1) July 2007 (1) June 2007 (1) April 2007 (1) March 2007 (1) February 2007 (3) December 2006 (11) November 2006 (11) October 2006 (13) September 2006 (15) August 2006 (11) July 2006 (18) June 2006 (7) May 2006 (14) April 2006 (6) March 2006 (14) February 2006 (5) January 2006 (2) December 2005 (9) November 2005 (8) October 2005 (13) September 2005 (12) August 2005 (9) July 2005 (16) June 2005 (16) May 2005 (16) April 2005 (12) March 2005 (14) February 2005 (19) January 2005 (15) December 2004 (14) November 2002 (17) October 2002 (19) September 2002 (22) August 2002 (21) July 2002 (15) May 2002 (21) April 2002 (21) February 2002 (15) January 2002 (15) December 2001 (17) October 2001 (24) September 2001 (18) July 2001 (19) June 2001 (18) October 2000 (17) September 2000 (21) August 2000 (19) July 2000 (16) June 2000 (26) May 2000 (21) April 2000 (22) March 2000 (28) February 2000 (18) January 2000 (20) December 1999 (20) November 1999 (26) October 1999 (25) September 1999 (18) August 1999 (40) July 1999 (38) June 1999 (24) May 1999 (27) April 1999 (25) March 1999 (26) February 1999 (29) January 1999 (24) July 1998 (12)

Search

View socialistactionusa’s profile on Facebook
View SocialistActUS’s profile on Twitter
View SocialistActionCT’s profile on YouTube


Subscribe to Our Newspaper



Upcoming Events
After the Women's March: Which Way Forward?
March 24, 2017 at 7:00 pm – 9:00 pm

Elmwood Community Center, 1106 New Britain Ave., West Hartford, Connecticut



Category Cloud

Actions & Protest Africa Anti-War Arts & Culture Black Liberation Canada Caribbean Civil Liberties Cuba East Asia Economy Education & Schools Elections Environment Europe Immigration Indigenous Rights International Labor Latin America Latino Civil Liberties Marxist Theory & History Middle East National Oppression Police & FBI Prisons South Asia Uncategorized Vote Socialist Action Women's Liberation


View Calendar


Blog at WordPress.com.



































Other related posts: