ABC Warns Republicans Against Challenging ObamaCare

In a recent statement, John Boehner reaffirmed his pledge to bring up a vote in the House to repeal ‘Obamacare,’ the health care bill that President Obama and the democratically controlled Congress passed in the last session.

While Boehner will be able to bring the measure up for a vote with his new republican majority, there is virtually no chance that the bill will pass, so the effort is more for show and political maneuvering than anything else.

If the repeal of ‘Obamacare’ passes the House, it will move on to the Senate, where Majority Leader, Democrat Harry Reid, is not likely to let the Senate vote on the measure. And even if somehow the Senate did pass the bill, President Obama would still have to sign it, which is not likely to happen.

Republicans are aware of the fact that their efforts to repeal the health care law has virtually no chance of passing, but will likely go through the motions as a symbolic gesture, so the GOP can try to use the failure as political fodder in the 2012 elections.

In a recent statement, Boehner blamed health care reform for the high unemployment rate, even though the problem began long before the health care bill was passed.

travelingirl wrote: I don't think so...

"What Americans want are common-sense, responsible solutions that address the rising cost of health care and other major problems. In the national Republican address on Saturday, October 31, 2009, House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) discussed Republicans’ plan for common-sense health care reform our nation can afford. Boehner’s address emphasized four common-sense reforms that will lower health care costs and expand access to quality care without a government takeover of our nation’s health care system that kills jobs, raises taxes on small businesses, or cuts Medicare for seniors:

■Number one: let families and businesses buy health insurance across state lines.
■Number two: allow individuals, small businesses, and trade associations to pool together and acquire health insurance at lower prices, the same way large corporations and labor unions do.
■Number three: give states the tools to create their own innovative reforms that lower health care costs.
■Number four: end junk lawsuits that contribute to higher health care costs by increasing the number of tests and procedures that physicians sometimes order not because they think it's good medicine, but because they are afraid of being sued.
http://www.gop.gov/solutions/healthcare

Specifically, our bill includes common-sense solutions to:

Guarantee that all Americans - regardless of pre-existing conditions and past illnesses - have access to the care they need at affordable prices by creating Universal Access Programs that expand and reform high-risk pools and reinsurance programs.

Encourage competition - which is key to lowering prices and increasing quality of care - by allowing Americans to shop for coverage from coast to coast and permitting Americans living in one state to purchase insurance in another.

Empower small businesses to pool together and offer health care at lower prices, just as corporations and labor unions do.

Reward innovation by providing incentive payments to states that reduce premiums and the number of uninsured.

Help end costly junk lawsuits that contribute to higher health care costs by increasing the number of tests and procedures that physicians sometimes order, not because they think it is good medicine, but because they are afraid of being sued.

These are just a few highlights of our bill. To learn more about the responsible, common-sense solutions in the Republican plan and read the entire bill, visit healthcare.gop.gov.

So, how would the Republicans provide for coverage of those with pre-existing conditions without the need for mandated purchase of health care?

Their answer is to create government supported high-risk insurance pools, operated by the states and funded with federal financial assistance for those with pre-existing medical conditions.

To examine this properly (and you should as the proposal is not without merit), you’ll have to get past the irony that the party of small government wishes to expand government involvement in health care in order to solve the problem of too much government in health care. I know…it’s confusing. However, if you can put this bit of weirdness aside, read on...

This returns us to the peculiar logic of the GOP’s support for such a program. It is, after all, the Republicans who insist that private industry will always do a better job than the government. In the case of insuring Americans with pre-existing conditions, our experience reveals that this is, in fact, true given that the high-risk pools already in operation have been particularly unsuccessful due to being underfunded.

So, why support a government solution that has, to date, not worked well at all?

According to most GOP proponents of this approach, the failures of the past can be rectified with adequate government funding. As made clear in the analysis above, it is highly unlikely that we would see such adequate funding. More likely, we would see a program similar to what we already have with some increase in funding, but nowhere near enough to actually make the program a success.

Under conservative plans for health care reform, many more Americans with pre-existing conditions would find it even more difficult to obtain reasonably priced care. This is because conservative plans often seek to substitute insurance coverage purchased in the individual market for group coverage, such as the insurance that many Americans have through their employers. These proposals also call for expanding existing high-risk pools, such as the Maryland program, to provide coverage for people with chronic illnesses and costly health histories. Today’s state-based high-risk pools provide an important coverage option for some individuals, but the coverage is expensive, and it’s only available to a small portion of those eligible.

In theory, these pools could provide a viable option for high-cost individuals. In practice, using these pools as a model for nationwide reform would be extremely expensive. Policymakers should consider other approaches to providing affordable, adequate coverage to costly individuals, such as expansion of group coverage options and guaranteed availability of health insurance, known as guaranteed issue in insurance parlance.