…everything the Healthcare Mandate was going to pay for, but not the Healthcare Mandate?!?
Michelle Malkin called out Senator Blunt:
(h/t TPM) GOP Sen. Roy Blunt of Missouri, vice chair of the Senate GOP Conference, told a St. Louis radio station two weeks ago that he supports keeping at least three ObamaCare regulatory pillars:
- Federally imposed coverage of “children” up to age 26 on their parents’ health insurance policies (the infamous, unfunded “slacker mandate”)
- Federally mandated coverage regardless of pre-existing conditions (“guaranteed issue,” which turns the very concept of insurance on its head and leads to an adverse-selection death spiral)
- Closure of the coverage gap in the massive Bush-backed Medicare drug entitlement (the “donut hole fix” that will obliterate the program’s cost-controls)
So, how are we going to pay for this Senator Blunt? Sunshine and fairy farts?
Read more on Talking Points Memo.
If enacting the 3 main pillars of ObamaCare is the Republican’s main solution should the Supreme Court strike down the mandate, why are they even joining the fight?
Clearly, nothing has been learned from the 2006 / 2008 shellacking and the 2010 salvaging of the Republican Party compliments of the Tea Party Movement. It’s still a party of milquetoast moderate solutions that will continue to bankrupt our country, create bigger government (albeit at a slower pace than Liberals), and destroy the fabric of what made America great… …the expectation that you go out and work for what you need and want.
NOBODY is talking about the real solution… …getting the Employer out of the Health Care business. Yes, cross-state-line purchases, HSAs, and removal of 1st-dollar payments will help. But, a huge portion of the problem is that the Employer is so involved in the Health Care business.
Under the current system, really only one person has to be satisfied with the Health Care Plan being offered to the company’s employees: the VP of Human Resources. If he or she is happy (after getting laid, tickets to the finest suites of every professional sports venue, golf outings, boat outings, and gala dinners — trust me, I’ve seen it), then the Employer chooses their plan. Maybe it’s the best of the three plans that the VP of HR had time to take a look at, but is it the best for 100% of the employees? Of course not.
The government got the Employer into the Health Care business with wage and price controls during World War II and on occasion beyond. They’ve got to get them out of the picture, so Health Care Companies work to keep their actual customer (the employee) happy — not Senior Management.
Then a market-based health-care exchange would make sense. Ever heard of Kayak? Priceline? Oribtz? Hotels.com? Apparently, the free market can build a system where you can compare rates for travel cheaply and efficiently. There’s no reason a free-market Health Insurance Exchange couldn’t do the same.
Then, the Employer can offer funding of a Health Care Plan… …and stay out of the CHOICE of a Health Care Plan. The Employee is then responsible for choosing the best plan from a menu of options. He or she can decide if they want to have the Appendectomy insured, or know that it costs $1500.00 (or whatever) and be prepared to pay for it.
If they choose not to have insurance, the Employer keeps the money… …and probably looks to hire someone more responsible. But, the Employee now has the best option to find the most suitable Health Care solution for his or her personal situation.
That, my liberal Republican friend, Mr. Blunt, is a good starting point for Health Care reform.