By John Lawrence
“Repeal and Replace” Just a Slogan
Republicans were fine with the way it was for the health care system before Obamacare went into effect. So why not just go back to the good old days when a pre-existing condition was enough to let an insurance company reject you from coverage? The good old days when price gouging by insurance companies was the order of the day. The good old days when pharmaceutical corporations could charge whatever they want for life saving drugs. Oh, that part is still true under Obamacare.The “Repeal and Replace” mantra was always nothing more than a slogan. Republicans have had 8 years to suggest a different system or enhancements to the one currently in effect. The sticking point is the pre-existing conditions part of Obamacare. According to a Kaiser Family Foundation Health Tracking Poll, 49 percent of respondents said they or a family member have a pre-existing condition. So eliminating that provision of Obamacare will affect a lot of Americans and Trump voters in particular. But Republicans will probably bite the bullet and do it anyway.
First of all Obamacare expanded Medicaid which is health care coverage for poor people. Well, poor people are not the Republicans’ traditional constituency. Rich people are, and rich people don’t have any problem with their health insurance coverage even if they have to pay through the nose for it. It’s a minor part of their expenses. Obamacare also gave subsidies to many people to get health insurance coverage. Well, people needing subsidies are not rich. The rich don’t need subsidies from the government. So Republicans don’t mind canceling this provision also. That leaves people who don’t need financial support or subsidies to provide health insurance for themselves. That means rich or better off Republicans.
Republicans don’t care that 20 million people have health insurance due to Obamacare that didn’t have it before because that’s 20 million poor or lower middle class people, people that vote for Democrats. Republicans would be happy to see all those people lose their health insurance as they subject them to the free market. After all they’re great believers in the free market. If you can’t afford to pay, you go without, and that’s what Republicans believe in. Whether it’s food, shelter, education or health insurance, Republicans don’t care if those that can’t afford to pay go without.
What About Emergency Room Care for Those Who Can’t Pay?

(Source: Philiplkinser/Wikimedia/CC-BY-SA-4.0)
So that means that poor people will have to rely on going to the emergency room every time they have a health problem? Don’t count on that either. It’s simply a law that emergency rooms have to take in people who can’t pay and provide some treatment at public expense. That law can be repealed by a Republican Congress just as easily as they can repeal Obamacare. That means that poor people will not be able to access emergency rooms either. They will have to rely on charity as a last resort. Republicans do believe in charity. After all isn’t that the American way? Rich people helping poor people instead of the government helping them? Noblesse oblige.
Pretty much charitable institutions are dependent on private philanthropy to keep them afloat. You are increasingly besieged by charitable institutions asking you to support them. Even at the check-out counter. Every time you buy pet food, you are asked by Petco to donate to help a homeless animal. Of course, you are not asked to contribute to homeless humans. They can fend for themselves and pull themselves up by their own bootstraps, those lucky enough to have boots, that is.
Even though Trump hasn’t come up with a replacement plan, House speaker Paul Ryan has several ideas. One is that, even if you lose your job at which your employer was paying for health insurance, you would still be allowed to pay for it yourself and not lose coverage. Of course, if you lose your job, you could ill afford to pay out of your pocket for health insurance. But that gets back to the Republican principle if you can’t pay for something you should do without. And if you miss one payment, that is enough for your health insurance provider to cancel your policy.
Another Republican mantra for replacing Obamacare is to allow health insurance companies to sell insurance across state lines. The idea is that by eliminating the red tape associated with state insurance regulation, insurers will be able to offer national plans with lower administrative costs. Oh, how the Republicans love to deregulate. There would be fewer rules imposed by the states, and insurers would only have to comply with minimal Federal regulations. I emphasize the word minimal. Supposedly this would increase competition among health insurance companies, and Republicans are always in favor of more competition, that is, unless the various corporations merge. Mergers and acquisitions are something Repubs like even more than competition.
Pre-existing Condition? No Problem
Back in the good old days, people with pre-exisitng conditions were covered by what was known as “risk pools.” It has been reported:
For sick patients who cannot continue coverage, Ryan’s plan calls for a return to state-run high-risk pools. These pools allow sick people to buy insurance separately, while states, insurers and the federal government help subsidize the cost. The president-elect’s website says he supports risk pools.
Risk pools have a long and controversial past. Before the ACA was passed, 35 states ran risk pools for people with preexisting conditions ranging from cancer and diabetes to more minor afflictions such as arthritis or eczema. Premiums for risk pool coverage were as much as 250 percent more than a healthy person would pay for individual insurance, and some states, overwhelmed with sick patients, had wait lists for coverage or imposed other restrictions, said [Cheryl] Fish-Parcham [Private Insurance Program Director, Families USA].
“Going back to risk pools is going back to the bad old days,” she said.
“High-risk pools served only 1 percent of the population back in 2008,” said Fish-Parcham. That wasn’t anywhere near the number of people who needed coverage but couldn’t afford it, she noted, adding: “Risk pools simply didn’t work.”
Another way insurance companies get out of paying a lot of money is life time caps. Republicans would be happy to see that as part of the “replacement.” So if you have a serious chronic condition, you will be treated up until the time when you reach your life time cap. After that you’re shit out of luck. Your benefits will have run out. It’s back to the risk pool for you. Or you can throw yourself on charity. Maybe have someone open a Go-Fund-Me website for you. Or you might win with Publisher’s Clearing House. Most people though will just have to grin and bear it. And eventually they will die. That’s the ultimate denouement.
Republicans are supportive of the rich, the talented and those who can make it on their own. They don’t have much sympathy for poor people, especially poor and sick people. The poor and the sick, the lame and the halt, don’t deserve to be a part of country club earth. Republicans consider themselves to be the “best and the brightest.” They are the ones who need to be supported and encouraged, whose genes need to be transferred to the next generation. They are all about the improvement of the race.
Before I reached the dismal bottom of the column (that is, that Republicans are “the ones who need to be supported and encouraged, whose genes need to be transferred to the next generation”) I was made to remember the term, Social Darwinism — a bastard adaptation of the real thing which argues that unregulated capitalismo on the order of Scrooge McDuck will prove who’s the best and brightest of us all and lead to the ultimate survival of man- and womenkind. Well, let’s eliminate “the brightest” from that fraudulant justification of waste and privilege, because bright people know it’s best to care for the weak and helpless because an illness under unlimited profiteering can bring misery and starvation to the presently comfortable. We’re all just a step away from homelessness. Another related fraud is John Calvin’s notion that prosperity is a marker for those who ought to rule us. We should follow the instructions of the wealthy. That fancy bullshit even gained a name: Calvinism, which is a nightmare that continues to grip much of Christianity. All this indifference to the suffering below them only shows that Trump and many others of his caste have learned nothing from history. Their elevation of Stoopid will bite them harder than it will those who have gained some callouses from sleeping on the ground.
Sounds like survival of the fittest to me. The corollary to this is of course, if you’re not among the “fittest” (whatever that is), then you die, that’s all. Simple. It’s the Republican (read “Amerikan”) way. Fits right in with free-market capitalism, the economic domination of the poor by the rich. No wonder the rich folk love it!
Are we not our brother’s keeper. I guess not, as long as rich folk run the show. Somehow, I don’t think this is what the forefathers envisioned.
Well, Paul, maybe it is what our forefathers envisioned. After all they were fine with slavery and counting slaves as three-fifths of a person for certain purposes which gave the South more seats in Congress even though the slaves had no rights whatsoever. Clearly, the founders envisioned Amerika as a place that valued white people more than black people. Trump and his supporters are still pursuing that Amerikan Dream.
Hi John. Thx for pointing this out.
Speaking of Trump: just as I’ve thought, he’s right on track to start WW3! Hasn’t been in office a month and already he is at odds with Australia, the UK and he has “put Iran on notice”. I think he is itching to start a war with somebody, anybody.
Ironically, Trumps behavior is actually helping Wolf-Pac in its effort to get 34 state resolutions passed, in MA at least where it has faced concerns over a “runaway” convention. Trump is galvanizing some legislators who were previously on the fence into taking action to get money out of politics.
I’ve said and written) for years that the meain difference between the pro(gressive)s and the con(servative)s is that we are basically generous and they are basically selfish. Their embrace of “social darwinism” is just more proof of that thesis.