Isn't Biden's public option plan just a more gradual way to get to M4all?

[Humanist_Activist]

Granted, I don't see how either is practical without there being hard price controls on medical billing and pharmaceutical pricing. Adding "competitiveness" means nothing when competition is generally impossible under medical insurance and provider industry.

I mean, he's going farther than even the public option that was floated for the ACA, to allow anyone to enroll in it. Under this scheme, what motivation would employers have to provide medical insurance? A public "option" will be the most economical "option" for the vast majority of Americans unless there ability to enroll in it are legally restricted, or what it covers is restricted to make private plans more "competitive" in comparison.

This is the reason I find the argument that "You get to keep the insurance you like." is so dishonest, we don't have that choice now, our employers do.

Not to mention the funding for the public option, it will have to involve increasing taxes, probably through FICA, to help fund it, in addition to premiums/etc.

It seems much farther reaching than the weak version floated during Obamacare's passage. How long before "Bidencare" is rolled into Medicare and Medicaid in the future?

[mopinko]

1. imho, this is the most irrelevant debate in the party.

the plain truth is that all of them will move us forward on this, and if we lose we are fucked.

in the end, all the stakeholders will be at the table, and doing this in a way that is not a big shock to the economy will be part of the consideration. imho, the compromises in the aca were due to this factor, at a time when the economy was very fragile. it will be more so in 2021.

the details will be hammered out in congress, regardless of the ideals of the pres. that's just a fact, and it would be nice if our candidates made this little civics lesson clear.

[BeyondGeography]

2. Very true

It comes down to who you trust from the standpoint of ability and commitment to get the best deal for the American people.

[Politicub]

13. Yes. This. +1

[Prosper]

3. Any bill will be compromised in passing.

Starting out asking for less and you get less. Counter to Biden’s position will be “ACA not repealed”. Settling for ACA standing as is or with minor concessions and millions continue to suffer more and die earlier.

[HerbChestnut]

4. That's what they said about the original ACA.

Now we're finally on the cusp of getting M4A, and there's Democrats running against it. Enough of the smoke and mirrors, just pass single payer while we have the chance.

[Voltaire2]

7. yeah. It is sad that we cannot, even now, do the right thing.

[NYMinute]

15. If Hillary had been elected, we would have made progress

with the public option.

Unfortunately, some threw a hissy fit and voted for Jill Stein -- like David Sirota, Nina Turner and Brihana Joy-Grey. You know who they work for now.

[Politicub]

5. A public option should not have the overhead of the private ACA plans, theoretically.

And for that reason, it should be able to offer more generous benefits and lower co-pays than the commercial plans. The commercial plans are out to make a profit and have an army of people whose job is to scrutinize bills so they can decline payment or approval.

Medicare's rates and policies are fairly uniform (Medicare Advantage plans are all over the place, though). I would hope the public option would build off of that structure.

A lot of people don't know that some parts of the ACA are superior to the Medicare law as it stands today. The ACA caps the max out of pocket each year. Once a person or family reaches the amount of pocket amount, there are no more costs incurred.

I don't think Medicare has the same max out of pocket policy in the law. The Sander's MFA bill will correct this, of course, since co-pays and deductibles will be things of the past.

The politicub household has both a plan from the ACA and medicare. My insurance plan is from the exchange and my husband has Medicare. He uses a medicare advantage provider to administer his benefits.

The drug prices under my ACA plan are lower than he pays. And, my specialist co-pay is less than his, too.

[Voltaire2]

6. After the insurance industry gets finished gutting it, it will probably not be a viable option.

I don't understand why you think a public option has to be funded through a payroll tax. You would buy this insurance the same why you do today: either through your employer or through the ACA exchanges. It isn't free. It also isn't subsidized directly. It pays for itself the same why private insurance does: through premiums as income and by limiting expenditures.

The HIC is hopeful that if they can prevent MFA, they can just nickle and dime the PO to death. It is what they do, and they are good at it.

[Humanist_Activist]

11. A public option won't be viable without there being some type of subsidy or tax base supporting it..

it can't be supported by just those who enroll in it, that's not practical at all. It would collapse within a year.

In that case its not a public option at all, just a government mandated non-profit insurance company.

[Gothmog]

8. Speaker Pelosi-There's no need to reinvent health care -- just improve Obamacare

I agree with Speaker Pelosi https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/17/nancy-pelosi-no-need-to-reinvent-health-care-improve-obamacare.html?__source=sharebar|twitter&par=sharebar

Democrats should focus on making improvements to Obamacare instead of trying to reinvent the wheel with “Medicare for All,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Tuesday.

“God bless” 2020 Democratic presidential candidates putting forth Medicare for All proposals, Pelosi said in an interview with “Mad Money” host Jim Cramer. “But know what that entails.”

Pelosi’s thoughts on how to improve the nation’s health-care laws appear to align with those of former Vice President Joe Biden, who in his 2020 presidential bid is calling for building on provisions of Obamacare, formally known as the Affordable Care Act.

“I believe the path to ‘health care for all’ is a path following the lead of the Affordable Care Act,” Pelosi told Cramer. “Let’s use our energy to have health care for all Americans, and that involves over 150 million families that have it through the private sector.”

[Gothmog]

9. As president, I'll protect and build on Obamacare to ensure every American receives the health care

Link to tweet

[Humanist_Activist]

10. Not sure that either post of yours is even relevant to what I'm talking about here...

which is the practical result of having a non-means tested public option available for everyone in the country to enroll in.

The current opinions of the politicians trying to win elections here doesn't matter. Unless the public option is either severely underfunded or restricted as to what it will cover so as to be useless for all but the most desperate to enroll in, or has means testing so severe its harder to get on it than it is for a childless man to get on Missouri's Medicaid, how will it not "steamroll" the so call competition that is private insurance?

[Blue_true]

12. Yes, and the most likely to work. nt

[comradebillyboy]

14. It's another step forward toward universal coverage...

[Hortensis]

16. With other needs added, such as dental, it's a MUCH faster way.

Also, the ACA has proven the excellent job hundreds of experts across many fields (ultimately thousands of contributors) did in designing it. The Republicans couldn't stop it from being passed, but they could prevent even one legislative tweak to improve afterward.

Any MfA plan would take several years to write, pass and implement, and then we'd find out if it was as well designed. And what weaknesses the anti-tax powers would choose to attack.

[Gothmog]

17. NBC/WSJ poll shows Biden's healthcare stance (optional Medicare buy-in) much more popular

Link to tweet