Republican House means end of Obamacare. Or does it?

[^_^ 5,021]

Since the health care bill passed in March, Republicans have vowed to "repeal and replace" it as a central part of their "Pledge to America."

Now that they will assume control of the House of Representatives next year, that GOP mission is among the options they'll have to weigh, health policy analysts say. "Repeal and replace" is unlikely to happen, the analysts agreed, so Republicans may have tough choices ahead.

"Absent a supermajority in both houses of Congress, efforts by either or both houses to reverse the law will most surely be vetoed," said Jay Wolfson, distinguished service professor of public health and medicine at the University of South Florida in Tampa.

...

If the Republicans choose to revise the bill, the challenge will be to preserve the more popular provisions while eliminating the ones that are not.

"The bill is so interwoven that it's hard to pull things out and keep things you like because it's all interrelated," [professor of health policy at Emory University in Atlanta] Thorpe said.

Thorpe said some of the health care bill's provisions that resonated well with the public, such as the elimination of pre-existing conditions as a reason to deny insurance coverage and guaranteed availability of coverage, won't be able to remain in effect unless there's a mandate requiring coverage for all.

"You need more people buying in to fund not excluding previous conditions," said Dr. David Nash, dean of the Jefferson School of Population Health at Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia.

...

With a repeal unlikely, Congress could debate whether to pay for certain provisions in the bill, although analysts disagreed on how much power it has over the payment system.

...

Jefferson's Nash said, "The way the payment system is set up, it's almost automatic. It will take a wholesale repeal to stop this payment system."

Instead of a repeal, opponents could also try to stall the bill's implementation.

"They could delay things using hearings or by opposing various appointments and other bits and pieces of the bill," Nash said.

...

"One of the biggest weaknesses of the current bill is that it really didn't go far enough to really reform how chronically ill patients are treated and how chronic diseases are prevented," Emory's Thorpe said. "There isn't enough focus on cost-containment."

Alan Sager, professor of health policy and management at the Boston University School of Public Health, said, "The government ignores most important health care issues; training more family doctors and paying them adequately, stabilizing all needed hospitals, cutting ER wait times, and working to contain costs."

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Health_Care/2010-vote-elections-health-care-overhaul-survive/story?id=12045125

[luckytxn 2,265]

No.

[^_^ 5,021]

No.

You're giving up before they've even had a chance?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Starve it! That's been the motto for the Republicans for about the last 30 years. The belief that if they just stop funding sectors of the government, we'll spend less. That sure worked under Reagan and the two Bushes.

[^_^ 5,021]

Starve it! That's been the motto for the Republicans for about the last 30 years. The belief that if they just stop funding sectors of the government, we'll spend less. That sure worked under Reagan and the two Bushes.

Reagan and the earned income tax credit. GHWB and the ADA. GWB and Medicare D. Small government? Really?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

They will fiddle around the edges, but not much is going to happen. Some of the more "egregious" aspects will cause a lot of hooting and hollering, but little of substance will occur, at least until after the next election.

[^_^ 5,021]

They will fiddle around the edges, but not much is going to happen.

I can't believe you guys are giving up before your people have even had a chance to do what you elected them to do. Y'all are acting like a bunch of Democrats.

[spookyturtle 9,466]

I can't believe you guys are giving up before your people have even had a chance to do what you elected them to do. Y'all are acting like a bunch of Democrats.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Reagan and the earned income tax credit. GHWB and the ADA. GWB and Medicare D. Small government? Really?

That's why the slogan of "smaller government" is nothing more than a feel-good fairy tale. The battle has always been over what kind of government do the people want, rather than equating it to some ambiguous description of size.

[luckytxn 2,265]

You're giving up before they've even had a chance?

Who has given up? The two major parties never undo the others agendas while they were party. They have threatened to do so to get elected but at the most they will make token changes and tweaks. To do otherwise would invite reciprocal action. Once the Socialists got it passed it was a done deal forever. Both these major parties love big government and bureaucracy. It is huge power to be able to wield.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Reagan and the earned income tax credit. GHWB and the ADA. GWB and Medicare D. Small government? Really?

Reagan was a closet hippie.

[^_^ 5,021]

Reagan was a closet hippie.

Hollywood makes me sick!

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I can't believe you guys are giving up before your people have even had a chance to do what you elected them to do. Y'all are acting like a bunch of Democrats.

What do you mean, "you guys"? I belong to the Pessimists Party.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Reagan was a closet hippie.

Is that why he was so forgetful - too much ganja?

[^_^ 5,021]

What do you mean, "you guys"? I belong to the Pessimists Party.

You can fool me once. You can even fool me twice. Hell, you can fool me up to six times and on rare occasions seven times but by the eight time you can fool me no more.