Really great fact checking from this news organization on the reality of the healthcare debate that's vital for however many individuals are impacted . . .
"The Missouri Democratic Party said that if a lawsuit backed by Hawley succeeds, "nearly 2.5 million Missourians with pre-existing conditions could lose their health care coverage."
"That figure represents the larger of two credible estimates. The alternative estimate is sizable -- 1.1 million people -- but it’s less than half as large as the figure cited in the tweet."
Read more:
"The Missouri Democratic Party said that if a lawsuit backed by Hawley succeeds, "nearly 2.5 million Missourians with pre-existing conditions could lose their health care coverage."
"That figure represents the larger of two credible estimates. The alternative estimate is sizable -- 1.1 million people -- but it’s less than half as large as the figure cited in the tweet."
Read more:
Would 2.5m Missourians lose health coverage if suit succeeds
In the closely watched U.S. Senate race in Missouri, Democrats have been going on offense over health care coverage. In a July 17 tweet, the Missouri Democratic Party trumpeted a lawsuit that was co-signed by Republican Attorney General Josh Hawley, who's challenging the Democratic incumbent, Claire McCaskill.
If you read the article, please note that both non-profit groups are referring to the same 2017 study, made by the US Department of Health and Human Services, and estimating the number of presently insured Missourians under the age of 65 who have "serious pre-existing health conditions".
ReplyDeleteThe lawsuit Hawley is a co-signer to would overturn the Affordable Care Act, and therefore allow Health Insurance Providers to refuse coverage of these pre-existing conditions.
The study estimates the number of presently insured Missourians with conditions that "could lead to loss of coverage" at 2.5 million, and those whose condition "would definitely lead to loss of coverage" at 1.1 Million.
Democrats cite the 2.5 million number of presently insured Missourians who COULD lose their coverage, while Republicans say the "lying Democrats" are exaggerating, and therefore ONLY 1.1 MILLION WOULD LOSE COVERAGE!
My innate cynicism makes me think that Insurers are more in the business of "taking money in" than they are in the business of "paying money out", so the number of people losing their Health Insurance would tend to be more like the 2.5 million number than the 1.1 million.
And of course, if the lawsuit Hawley has co-signed had not been filed, that number would tend more toward ZERO!
My insurance nearly tripled under Obamacare and I have to have a $10,000 deductible to keep it from being even higher but Democrats and the media don't want to talk about that. They don't care about the millions of middle class folks that don't qualify for Obamacare and are adversely affected by it.
ReplyDeleteIf the US had adopted Universal Healthcare when Teddy Roosevelt first advocated it in 1903, the problems such as those described by @ 8:23 probably would have been fixed by now.
ReplyDeleteSimilarly if it had been adopted in 1927 when Hoover proposed it, in 1957 when Eisenhower asked for it, in 1961 when JFK wanted it, in 1966 when Johnson wanted it, in 1971 when Nixon advocated it, and so on. After Germany has had Universal Healthcare since 1848, and they have been able to "tune" it to adapt to changes in Society.
No, it's only fairly recently that the GOP has become adamantly opposed to the concept, probably due to the influence of "Big Medicine" and "Big Pharma".
Little discussion of fixing problems, just cries of "I want to pick my own Doctor" (which you haven't been able to do since the 1960s, your Insurance Provider picks your doctor,) If its so bad, why doesn't the GOP offer an alternative other than "Scrap It"?
Next we'll hear the GOP ranting about garbage such as "look at Canada, there are large numbers (never defined) of Canadians who cross into the US for Medical Care, without disclosing that hey come to the US for "elective cosmetic surgery" and Chiropractic "treatment", neither of which are covered by ANY Universal Healthcare system.
9:30: under your universal care proposal, will everybody be entitled to treatment for every sickness and trauma, both physical and mental, until the patient is either cured or deceased? E.g. if a 95 year old person's heart is giving out, will he have the righ to a transplant? If so, tell us how much that is going to cost the taxpayers. If not, tell us who is not going to get treated, under what circumstances and why not.
ReplyDeleteUniversal health care sounds noble, but as always the devil is in the details.
You are correct in that I don't have the expertise by my self to give you the details of how a "Universal Healthcare" (not my idea, but thank you for the compliment) would work in every instance, that's what we pay "experts" for.
ReplyDeleteI can however tell you what will happen if the GOP succeeds in abolishing the Affordable Care Act, and substitutes the "Screw you, crawl off and die" plan that appears to be the only alternative they are willing to offer.
BUT, since every other first and second-tier Country in the World (except for the USA and then next in size the Malagasy Republic) has it, I do feel that we have the capability to create it.
The biggest drawback, of course, is that the average income of a Physician drops in those Countries to about the same level as that of a tenured University Professor, which goes a long way toward explaining why we've never tried it.
12:51 - Thanks for the refreshingly un-insulting response - a rarity on this board. A couple closing points
ReplyDeleteI want to know the precise cost of such a program, plus exactly who will be treated and who will not be treated for what, BEFORE it is voted on, and not left to the discretion of a group of self anointed experts after the fact.
If the GOP does manage to put Obamacare out of its end of life misery, I hope they do not replace it with anything at the national level. Let the states decide how to provide health treatment, through insurance or not, to their citizens from their closer perspective than the one size fits all feds.
Some truths the Democrats and the Socialists don't understand:
ReplyDeleteIt is NOT the job of government to provide ANYONE with healthcare, period.
Your 'right' to healthcare only extends as far as your wallet, not unlike food, water, housing, cable or any other goods and services you buy.
Government only does a few things well: Kill, Steal and Control. This is why we have a Constitution that is supposed to restrict the government to do only those things allowed within that document. Healthcare and other welfare entitlements aren't listed as government functions and they shouldn't be.