Connect with us

Everything

Will Graham-Cassidy lead to single-payer?

Published

on

The entire health insurance industry has come out against the GOP Graham-Cassidy bill.

Industry lobbying group America’s Health Insurance Plans, in a letter to Senate leaders, outlined concerns that the law might lead to states setting up their own single-payer health systems.

The Graham-Cassidy-Heller-Johnson proposal fails to meet these guiding principles, and would have real consequences on consumers and patients by further destabilizing the individual market; cutting Medicaid; pulling back on protections for pre-existing conditions; not ending taxes on health insurance premiums and benefits; and potentially allowing government-controlled, single payer health care to grow.

The letter outlined five other principles the health insurance industry would like to see addressed:

  1. Stabilize the individual insurance market
  2. Medicaid reforms must ensure the program is efficient, effective, with adequate funding
  3. Guarantee access to coverage for ALL Americans, including pre-existing conditions
  4. Provide sufficient time for everyone to prepare
  5. Eliminate taxes and fees

The association of 36 independent Blue Cross Blue Shield insurers have also joined the lobbying effort against the bill, with their primary dig that the proposal doesn’t repeal the “Cadillac tax” on health insurance.


Further reading…

Support Graham-Cassidy, because of the sparrows and the chickens by Steve Berman

http://noqreport.com/2017/09/20/support-cassidy-graham-because-of-the-sparrows-and-the-chickens/To get the most consumers, and make money doing it, capitalist insurance companies will find a way to carve themselves a piece of the most lucrative markets. At first, they all supported Obamacare because they smelled money, and many make it hand over fist in the markets where they compete, since they’re allowed to pull out where they don’t make money. Watch them lobby state legislatures and Congress to tweak coverages and products to their liking, and block the growth of medical sharing associations, direct to consumer health care markets, and other innovations. You’ll hear them say it’s “against consumer interest” and slam quality standards. Read more…

5 foolish reasons to support Graham-Cassidy and 2 solid reasons to oppose it by JD Rucker

http://noqreport.com/2017/09/20/5-reasons-support-graham-cassidy-2-reasons-oppose/Ask a conservative Republican voting for this if they think it’s going to work. Their answer will invariably be that it will “be better than what we’ve got.” They believe that if they pass nothing that President Trump will turn on them. He will. If this bill had been introduced five months ago it wouldn’t get 35 GOP votes. At this point, they’ll take anything they can get their hands on. That alone spells doom for America if it passes. I, for one, am not excited about the Graham-Cassidy-Stepping-Stone-To-Single-Payer Bill. Read more…


Perspectives

5 Factors That Could Interfere With Graham-Cassidy’s State Waivers | Christopher Jacobs, The Federalist

http://thefederalist.com/2017/09/21/5-factors-interfere-graham-cassidys-state-health-care-waivers/If the sponsors believe in state flexibility, they should allow states to waive all federal insurance regulations, even ones, such as the under-26 mandate or mental health parity, they may personally support. Or better yet, they should move to repeal the regulations entirely, and let states decide which ones they want to re-enact on the state level.

Health insurers oppose Graham-Cassidy bill, citing single-payer concerns | Kimberly Leonard, Washington Examiner

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/health-insurers-oppose-graham-cassidy-bill-citing-single-payer-concerns/article/2635075“To best serve every American, we need both a strong private market and an effective role for and partnerships with government,” Tavenner wrote. “Building on the choice, competition and innovation of the private sector and the strength, security and dependability of public programs is a far more effective solution than allowing states to eliminate private insurance.”

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Wednesday that he intended to bring the bill to the floor next week. The Senate faces a Sept. 30 deadline to pass the bill through a simple majority vote, known as reconciliation, according to a recommendation by the Senate parliamentarian.

Why The Latest GOP Health Care Plan Is The Best One Yet | John Daniel Davidson, The Federalist

http://thefederalist.com/2017/09/20/latest-gop-health-care-plan-best-one-yet/Contrary to much of the media coverage this week, the push by congressional Republicans to do something about Obamacare isn’t a desperate last-ditch effort or a “health care zombie.” On the contrary, it might be the best health-care reform idea GOP leaders have come up with yet.

A Bogus Health-Care Number from the Center for American Progress | Dan McLaughlin, National Review

A new analysis by Avalere Health, funded by the left-wing Center for American Progress, is making headlines for supposedly finding that Graham-Cassidy would cut $4 trillion in health care funding to states through 2036. Outlets like CNBC and Axios have led their stories with the $4 trillion number in the headline. But it’s fundamentally dishonest and anti-democratic.

Reactions

Final Thoughts

Graham-Cassidy is health care reform turned on its head. Its supporters want it because they believe it will fail, and its opponents hate it because they think it could be implemented. In reality, the nay-sayers are likely right. Most states can’t pass enabling legislation in just three years. Some state legislatures only meet for 40 days a year, and require two readings for major legislation. How in the world could it possibly be in place, at the state level, by 2020, when Obamacare has not been fully implemented in seven years?

Therefore, the nay-sayers who think this will lead to state-level single-payer are playing a Pied Piper tune. And those who believe it GC will save $4 trillion are taking some kind of hallucinogenic drug. At best, the bill is a stepping-stone to the 2018 election for Republicans to say “See, we did something!” to their constituents, and a hope that the next round of reforms (which will be required) will move more toward a private system versus a government takeover.

Clearly, for insurance companies, they’d rather have an individual mandate–what company would be against forcing everyone to buy their product? That explains their united opposition. Doctors oppose it because it can’t work and would leave the health care industry perilously unstable–if allowed to actually take effect. But I think most people who have studied it agree that this bill, if passed into law, will never take effect.

The consensus is that there’s no possible way GC could ever work. Will passing it lead to single-payer? No more than not passing it. The only difference of opinion is over whether that failure is a good thing or a bad thing.

Advertisement
1 Comment

1 Comment

  1. Steve Nickerson

    September 21, 2017 at 6:57 pm

    “pulling back on protections for pre-existing conditions”
    Right there you can tell this is a lie
    Pre Existing conditions is the #1 thing the Insurance industry wants to NOT cover because it will bankrupt them

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Democrats

Leftist media pushes back on Green New Deal criticism

Published

on

Leftist media pushes back on Green New Deal criticism

It’s been an up-and-down couple of weeks for proponents of the Green New Deal. Before details were released, it was already being heralded as the greatest thing since President Obama’s election. Then, the details came out and even many on the left were taken aback by the ambitious and incoherent provisions of the deal as detailed in a FAQ section on Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s government web page.

But that was just a draft. They took it down. At least that was the story.

Unfortunately for proponents, they were caught a little flat-footed as questions started pouring in about, well, all of it. Even if we dismiss the less-draconian concepts such as eliminating air travel or the less-sane ideas like taking care of those who are unwilling to work, the left is still stuck with a proposal that the most frugal estimates put at costing around $7 trillion while other’s consider the decade-long cost to be in the HUNDREDS of trillions of dollars.

This is, of course, ludicrous. There’s not enough money in the entire world to pay for the proposal if its cost is somewhere between the lowest and highest estimates, but that hasn’t stopped leftist media from regrouping. Now that the dust has settled a little bit, they’re doing everything they can to recommit to this concept. It’s not that they suddenly believe in this fairy tale. It’s that they don’t want this to be the issue Republicans attack in the 2020 elections.

One article in particular that I read from CNN (yes, sometimes I need to see what the other side is thinking) really struck me for its honesty about the situation. Though I stopped reading it in paragraph two when it referred to “non-partisan” PolitiFact, I went back to it just now to digest the awfulness fully (see the sacrifices I make for our readers!).

To be clear, much of what this article says is correct. It asserts the GOP will take the tenets of the Green New Deal and use it to scare voters into thinking it’s even worse than Obamacare. From 2010 through 2016, Republicans attacked Obamacare incessantly and it worked, giving them the House in 2010, the Senate in 2014, and the White House in 2016. Unfortunately, they stopped there and didn’t actually go after Obamacare with the same fervor they held in their campaign rhetoric and now the Democrats have turned the issue on its head.

But here’s the thing. Obamacare may have been bad, but the Green New Deal truly is worse. It’s not even close. Even if we take at face value the notion that the Green New Deal is simply an ambitious framework around which real legislation can be forged, we have to look at the core issues entailed in order to see the true damage it can do. This is a socialist document. It’s a call for the same levels of insanity that drive the Medicare-for-All movement. Within its frivolous attempts to change perceptions of air travel, cows, and job creation is a deep-rooted desire to convert Americans to needing more government.

NOQ Report needs your support.

The Green New Deal represents the far-left’s desire to make more American dependent on government. At the same time, it aims to increase the levels of dependency for those who are already in need of assistance. It wants Democrats to latch their wagons on the notion that if we become a militantly environmentalist nation, that will serve the dual purpose of giving us fulfillment while saving the planet.

I believe most leftist journalists understand this, but they see in the ridiculous framework a path through which Republicans can be defeated wholesale in 2020 as long as the left can control the narrative surrounding the Green New Deal. They fear another Obamacare counterinsurgency that would wipe out the anti-Trump gains they made in 2018, so they’ve adopted a stance that the Green New Deal isn’t as bad as Fox News says it is. Meanwhile, they’re doing everything they can to say, “look over here and not at the Green New Deal.”

The politics behind what the Green New Deal represents is more in play than the tenets of the proposal itself, at least in the eyes of leftist media. It’s not that they want to promote the concept. They simply don’t want the concept to derail their party in the next election.

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Louis Farrakhan refers to Ilhan Omar as ‘sweetheart,’ prompting zero outrage

Published

on

Louis Farrakhan refers to Ilhan Omar as sweetheart prompting zero outrage

Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan referred to Representative Ilhan Omar (D-MN) as “Sweetheart” as he addressed her during a speaking engagement on Sunday. He apparently caught his faux pas and immediately justified the remark, but at that point the moniker which many consider to be sexist or misogynistic had already been noted.

Nevertheless, it didn’t cause the stir one might expect. As a far-left progressive, Omar is known for being a feminist icon on Capitol Hill even though she hasn’t been in office for a full two months yet. As our EIC noted, the lack of a rebuke was because of the source, not because she now feels it’s okay to refer to her as “sweetheart.”

The statement came as Farrakhan was telling Omar she shouldn’t be sorry for the statements she made last week about Israel, AIPAC, and Jewish influence in Washington DC, particularly over Republicans.

In a world where consistency was still considered a virtue, followers of Omar would be wondering why she’s not expressing outrage over the belittling reference from a powerful man. But the world isn’t consistent and Farrakhan always gets a pass.

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Democrats

Kamala Harris stutters through non-answer when asked about her Jussie Smollett Tweet

Published

on

Kamala Harris stutters through non-answer when asked about her Jussie Smollett Tweet

In one of the most cringeworthy moments of Senator Kamala Harris’s new presidential campaign, the California Democrat found herself hesitant and uncertain about her feelings towards Jussie Smollett’s apparent hate-crime hoax. This is in stark contrast to her bold and racially charged accusations of a “modern day lynching” allegedly perpetrated by two Nigerian actors at the request of Smollett himself.

Above, you can see her attempt to calm the situation and state that facts are still emerging about the case. Of course, this is three weeks after the alleged incident, which is strange since her response the moment the news broke seemed to express zero interest in waiting for facts to emerge.

“. is one of the kindest, most gentle human beings I know. I’m praying for his quick recovery. This was an attempted modern day lynching. No one should have to fear for their life because of their sexuality or color of their skin. We must confront this hate.”

This is the latest minefield Democrats find themselves traversing after quickly reacting to false claims. It happened with the Covington Catholic School boys. It’s happened far too many times since President Trump ran for President in 2016.

The anti-MAGA hoax epidemic

http://noqreport.com/2019/02/18/anti-maga-hoax-epidemic/There’s a trend that’s been quietly, consistently rearing its ugly head against the President of the United States and his supporters since before the 2016 election. We’ve seen it among unhinged journalists, virtue-signaling celebrities, and Democratic politicians. We’ve seen it manifest in the ugliest form of hatred – the common hate-hoax – and it’s doing more to divide America than the source of the perpetrators’ anger.

They hate President Trump. They hate the people who got him elected. The hate the idea of making America great again because as much of the MAGA agenda comes to pass, they’re learning they’ve been wrong the whole time. I know first hand. I’ve been proven wrong myself.

It doesn’t take a skilled orator or ethical paragon to say, “I reacted too quickly before. I should have waited for all of the facts to come out before reacting emotionally.” Of course, doing so requires humility, which Kamala Harris apparently does not have.

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending

Copyright © 2019 NOQ Report