But Senate rules do, in fact, allow repeal of ObamaCare’s insurance regulations through the special “budget reconciliation” process that requires only 51 votes to approve legislation. Even if the Senate parliamentarian misinterprets those rules — and this would be an egregious misinterpretation — a majority of the Senate can overrule that misinterpretation.In short, the question is not whether Republicans can repeal the regulations. It is whether they have the will.
Using the word repair “captures exactly what the large majority of the American people want,” said Frank Luntz, a prominent Republican consultant and pollster who addressed GOP lawmakers at their retreat.“The public is particularly hostile about skyrocketing costs, and they demand immediate change,” Luntz said in an e-mail response to questions. “Repair is a less partisan but no less action-oriented phrase that Americans overwhelmingly embrace.”
The Republican congressional leadership has made a new timetable for gutting the Affordable Care Act, aiming to get legislation done by March or possibly April.But that doesn’t give insurers much time to meet their first deadline for submitting plans for 2018 on the individual market, which includes the law’s exchanges.
Rand Paul’s health plan ensures that Americans can purchase the health insurance coverage that best fits their needs by eliminating Obamacare’s essential health benefits requirement, along with other restrictive coverage and plan requirements, to once again make low-cost insurance options available to American consumers.
It also protects individuals with pre-existing conditions by providing a two-year open-enrollment period under which individuals with pre-existing conditions can obtain coverage.
The plan helps more people save to buy health insurance and cover medical costs by authorizing a tax credit (up to $5,000 per taxpayer) for individuals and families that contribute to HSAs, removes the annual cap on HSAs so individuals can make unlimited contributions, and allows those HSA funds to be used for a wide range of uses. Its money you have designated for health related costs, so you should be able to use it for things like prescription and OTC drugs, dietary supplements, nutrition and physical exercise expenses, and direct primary care, among others.
Attributing such massive changes to individual mandate repeal is unbelievable. The chief architect of the ACA, economist Jonathan Gruber, has reported that the individual mandate had no significant effect on increasing coverage — eliminating it should have minimal effect. The mandate is riddled with exceptions that allow people to avoid buying insurance. The mandate also does little to motivate insurance purchase because penalties for failing to obtain coverage are low compared to insurance premiums. The IRS reports that during the 2016 tax season 11 million people claimed exemptions and 5.6 million people paid an average penalty of $442 – far less than the cost of insurance.
Molina Healthcare CEO J. Mario Molina isn’t fazed by President Trump’s Obamacare executive order. But he’s also not entirely confident about what will happen with the law and its insurance marketplaces — and he won’t commit to staying in the marketplaces in 2018.In an interview, Molina said the executive order is “symbolic” and doesn’t change the plans for his company, an insurer that mostly covers Medicaid members but also has more than a half million Obamacare customers. Yet when asked if Molina Healthcare would keep offering Obamacare plans in 2018, he said: “There are just too many unknowns at this point to give a definitive answer.”
State Experiences Show Why Repealing the ACA’s Premium Subsidies and Individual Mandate Would Cripple Individual Health Insurance Markets – The Commonwealth FundJanuary 23, 2017
With the substance of an alternative plan up in the air, uncertainty has grown over when the law might be replaced. Republican leaders have suggested Congress should repeal parts of the ACA now and leave the details of replacement until later. But “repeal and delay” has drawn criticism from stakeholders and policy experts who point out the strategy is likely to cause significant harm to insurance markets and consumers long before a replacement plan materializes, and a growing number of lawmakers have expressed discomfort about the proposal.
What happens if Congress and the new president push ahead with partial repeal without securing support for a replacement? The resulting regulatory landscape would look like what several states had in place prior to the ACA. Their experiences were poor.