I actually haven't been keeping up with this issue. What is it about an individual mandate that you view to be a non-negotiable aspect of a health care act?
Without the individual mandate, you end up with a death spiral--unless you let prices float for pre-existing conditions. The Republicans chose the latter. It's no wonder that disabled people are having a massive protest in DC right now (though that's for Medicaid, too.)
They are also cutting the cost-sharing risk pool, which means that companies must raise rates to cover their increased risk. I truly don't understand this: The only group who is likely to profit from this is reinsurance companies and companies who win the risk lottery (which to be sure is most companies in a given year.) But it's a dead loss for consumers, at almost no tax benefit.
I actually haven't been keeping up with this issue. What is it about an individual mandate that you view to be a non-negotiable aspect of a health care act?
ReplyDeleteWithout the individual mandate, you end up with a death spiral--unless you let prices float for pre-existing conditions. The Republicans chose the latter. It's no wonder that disabled people are having a massive protest in DC right now (though that's for Medicaid, too.)
ReplyDeleteYeah, that's what I was thinking...but I guess an employer mandate might partially substitute?
ReplyDeleteApparently the Senate bill tries to build in *incentives,* but no mandate...but it sounds pretty weak.
They are also cutting the cost-sharing risk pool, which means that companies must raise rates to cover their increased risk. I truly don't understand this: The only group who is likely to profit from this is reinsurance companies and companies who win the risk lottery (which to be sure is most companies in a given year.)
ReplyDeleteBut it's a dead loss for consumers, at almost no tax benefit.