Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Romney attacks health care law similar to


THE MATRIX

Recommended Posts

link

CHICAGO (AP) - Mitt Romney has a problem with Obamacare. It looks a lot like Romneycare. The prospective Republican presidential candidate's vulnerability on the issue was evident this week, when he was interrupted during a tour for his new book by a woman upset with the Massachusetts health care law Romney signed as governor in 2006. That law has some of the same core features as the federal law President Barack Obama, a Democrat, signed on Tuesday.

And that's creating an uncomfortable straddle for Romney as his party makes attacking the new health care law its main message this midterm year.

"We are up to here with Republicans not being conservative enough," Dr. Sharon Sikora, a local dentist, said as she raised her hand over her head. "And with all due respect, governor, your health care in Massachusetts is not the be-all and end-all, and there are significant problems with that, and I wouldn't embrace that today, either."

Romney conceded the Massachusetts plan "isn't perfect" and is "a work in progress," but he put part of the blame on Democrats who overrode vetoes he believes would have improved the original plan.

And then, instead of dissociating himself from the plan as he did during his 2008 White House race, Romney complained the president didn't tap his expertise while crafting the federal measure.

"No one came to talk to me," Romney said. "It's very clear that people thought they had the answer without getting the benefit of the experiment."

Like the new federal law, the Massachusetts plan requires individuals to buy health insurance and imposes tax penalties on those who don't. Both plans penalize small businesses above a certain size that don't provide coverage to their employees. And both rely on new taxes for some of their financing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
  • Replies 5
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • AROCES

    3

  • Startraveler

    2

  • THE MATRIX

    1

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

You mean the cost control efforts you claim aren't in there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You mean the cost control efforts you claim aren't in there?

There is nothing there that will lower the cost, why do you think almost a trillion is needed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's no mystery there. It costs $940 billion over ten years because it pays for three things:

  • $434 billion in additional Medicaid and CHIP outlays
  • $466 billion in exchange subsidies and related spending (for reference, we spend about $250 billion per year on the tax exclusion--i.e. subsidy--for employer-based health insurance)
  • $40 billion in small employer tax credits

Meanwhile it contains the excise tax, the Independent Medicare Advisory Board, more than 20 Medicare and Medicaid pilots on payment and delivery system reform (e.g. bundling, pay-for-performance and other value-based purchasing efforts, accountable care organizations etc), prevention programs, comparative effectiveness research, HIT/HIE promotion, funds and policy changes to fight fraud and abuse in Medicare, and, of course, the health insurance exchanges themselves.

Edited by Startraveler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's no mystery there. It costs $940 billion over ten years because it pays for three things:

  • $434 billion in additional Medicaid and CHIP outlays
  • $466 billion in exchange subsidies and related spending (for reference, we spend about $250 billion per year on the tax exclusion--i.e. subsidy--for employer-based health insurance)
  • $40 billion in small employer tax credits

Meanwhile it contains the excise tax, the Independent Medicare Advisory Board, more than 20 Medicare and Medicaid pilots on payment and delivery system reform (e.g. bundling, pay-for-performance and other value-based purchasing efforts, accountable care organizations etc), prevention programs, comparative effectiveness research, HIT/HIE promotion, funds and policy changes to fight fraud and abuse in Medicare, and, of course, the health insurance exchanges themselves.

As you can see, no matter how you try to justify it, the cost is still almost a Trillion. And you call that lowering the cost. Let me guesss, you will say now it could have been $2 trillion if not for the brilliant Orator.wink2.gif

Edited by AROCES
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.