Health
care “repeal and reform” is a mess, and both parties must share
the responsibility for what now appears to be a national crisis.
It’s
worth recalling the essential elements of the Affordable Care Act –
Obamacare – that have led to the crisis.
The
ACA extended health insurance coverage to tens of millions of people
who could not be assured of decent medical care because they couldn’t
pay for it. They would be required to buy insurance in the
marketplace, but would receive financial help to pay for it.
Obviously,
expanding coverage with government financial help requires more
public funds, so the ACA provided for tax increases on the wealthiest
individuals and on employers providing luxury, “Cadillac”
insurance plans.
If
people did not have employer-provided plans, they would turn to state
market places in which insurers would compete for their business.
However, there could be no public, nonprofit option available as a
competitor and a backstop, because congressional Republicans blocked
it.
The
ACA worked, but not entirely well. Millions more gained coverage.
But some states, like Maine, refused federal aid to extend low-income
coverage. Costs rose because of uncertainty in Washington about
federal funding. Some insurers dropped out of state markets. The
wealthy fretted.
President
Obama did a poor job selling a major new policy, and the GOP attacked
it successfully, gaining control of Congress. Then, more than 50
times, it voted outright repeal of the ACA without an alternative,
knowing that Obama could prevent their gesture from ever becoming
law.
Finally,
Republicans gained control of both houses of Congress and the
presidency. Though President Trump made generous promises about a
replacement, he had no proposal, leaving the solution to
congressional Republicans who could pass a bill without a single
Democratic vote.
As
David Brooks, the New York Times columnist wrote, many Republicans
ignored conservatism, with which they were identified, for a simple
solution: reduce the number of people covered and the coverage, while
eliminating the tax increases supporting the ACA.
This
approach is consistent with a broader GOP policy that calls for
reducing the size of government and cutting taxes. Reducing coverage
saves money. It does not matter that millions would lose or be
denied health insurance and find themselves forced back into
emergency rooms for their care.
Part
of their “repeal and replace” policy would allow younger people
with fewer health problems not to purchase coverage, reducing the
insurance pool supporting the costs of older citizens.
These
reforms would all take place by modifying, but not repealing, the
ACA. Hard-line conservatives thought they did not go far enough and
opposed the proposed changes. Moderate Republicans thought they cut
off too many people and they, too, opposed the proposed changes.
Result?
No bill that can command the nearly unanimous Republican support
required.
Meanwhile,
conservative institutions have come up with reform proposals. They
start by accepting that all people should have insurance coverage.
They suggest reducing costs by lowering the income cap for Medicaid
eligibility, cutting any federal subsidy for help above that level.
People
should be allowed to use their health savings accounts to buy prepaid
care, under which a medical procedure would be priced as a whole
instead of by each provider in the process. And the “Cadillac”
tax on luxury plans would remain.
Congress
would also lift its prohibition on Medicare conducting competitive
bidding for drugs. That would save the program billions that could
support health coverage.
The
conservative view is that reforms need to be made that can survive a
change in political control in Washington. Otherwise, if the voters
don’t like the GOP “reforms,” they will elect Democrats to
repeal the repeal.
What’s
wrong with the Democrats? They are acting just as Republicans did.
They have not said a word about the changes to ACA they would propose
to fix its problems. They hope to gain support simply by opposing
the Republicans.
The
obvious leader should be Barack Obama, who should lead in developing
ACA improvements instead of washing his hands of Washington. A
former president, even one with a namesake program, staying in the
fray is unusual, but Trump proves these are unusual times. Other
Democrats could accept his leadership, because they know he can’t
run again.
Nothing
can be expected from the White House that simply wants to take credit
for whatever is passed. Everybody needs to accept almost universal
coverage, but there should be Republican and Democratic alternatives
from which both sides could negotiate.
The
risk of failure not only threatens the health care system, but
government itself.
No comments:
Post a Comment