Big Trump news due today

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

There is definitely something very admirable about a Republican in 2011 who is willing to stand by the individual mandate. Both Romney and Gingrich have made themselves look very good in the last few days. Their objections to the PPACA are more along the lines of state vs federal, which is actually a fair point of debate.

Coverage guarantee for people with pre-existing conditions cannot be done without an individual mandate. Any person looking at it objectively knows that. And that is the point where Romney's "plan" falls apart. You can't issue federal guarantee of coverage - funding and all - while leaving the states at liberty to decide whether they will require people within their states to carry insurance. What you'd have is one of two things: You either make the federal funding for pre-existing coverage open ended which would turn into hundreds of billions of dollars in federal funds being poured onto mostly those states where people don't have to carry insurance (that's not going to be sustainable) or you'd provide fixed funds and thereby de-facto force states to issue insurance mandates onto their people. So really, once you issue coverage guarantee, there must be an insurance mandate. The question then is whether the feds mandate the states to mandate their populations or whether the feds mandate the US citizenry. I don't know that that is a difference worth debating.

[^_^ 5,021]

Coverage guarantee for people with pre-existing conditions cannot be done without an individual mandate. Any person looking at it objectively knows that. And that is the point where Romney's "plan" falls apart. You can't issue federal guarantee of coverage - funding and all - while leaving the states at liberty to decide whether they will require people within their states to carry insurance.

Is a federal guarantee of coverage part of Romney's "plan"? I am not up to all the details but have not heard of that.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Is a federal guarantee of coverage part of Romney's "plan"? I am not up to all the details but have not heard of that.

I guess the answer is a yes and no. Yes for those that have been insured for a period of time and no for those that have not. The latter would then fall into state coverage for which the feds would reduce funding. I can see that working out just fine...

His plan would still ensure that some people with preexisting conditions aren’t refused access to coverage, one of the most popular aspects of the Obama plan. But Romney said that that requirement would apply to those who have already had insurance for an undefined amount of time — which could, in essence, still allow insurers to deny coverage.

[^_^ 5,021]

I guess the answer is a yes and no. Yes for those that have been insured for a period of time and no for those that have not. The latter would then fall into state coverage for which the feds would reduce funding. I can see that working out just fine...

That kind of sounds like the PPACA before 2014. Today, if you have insurance you have insurance and can not be dropped due to a pre-existing condition due to PPACA. Today, if you don't have insurance and have a pre-existing no insurer is required to insure you and you have to go six months without insurance before the PPACA lumps you into your states high risk pool.

The difference, of course, is that PPACA envisions something better in 2014 and beyond whereas Romney's plan takes the crappy status quo and makes sure it stays the status quo.

[Vi-Jay 218]

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

That kind of sounds like the PPACA before 2014. Today, if you have insurance you have insurance and can not be dropped due to a pre-existing condition due to PPACA. Today, if you don't have insurance and have a pre-existing no insurer is required to insure you and you have to go six months without insurance before the PPACA lumps you into your states high risk pool.

The difference, of course, is that PPACA envisions something better in 2014 and beyond whereas Romney's plan takes the crappy status quo and makes sure it stays the status quo.

Right. Free riders continue to have a free ride and the insured as well as the taxpayer at large pick up the tab for those that lack personal responsibility. Communism at its finest: Everyone contributes according to their ability and everyone receives according to their need. When will the GOP go full red?