The plan begins by repealing ObamaCare. It would also “guarantee access” to people with pre-existing conditions, through a “high-risk pool, reinsurance, or some other method ensuring those with chronic conditions can obtain needed care.”
Like the Republican Study Committee’s plan, Jindal’s proposal replaces the current exclusion of employer-based tax benefits with a standard tax deduction. The problems:
- It is regressive, giving more tax relief, the higher your income tax bracket.
- It is not helpful to the half of the population that does not pay income tax.
Now that ObamaCare has handed out tax credits to millions of people in the health-insurance exchanges, the total effect of the plan would likely be to take insurance away from a large proportion of the people insured through the exchanges, as well as all the people covered by ObamaCare’s Medicaid expansion. By election day, it would probably un-insure ten million people.
We are so far into ObamaCare, repealing it now would probably be a major setback. Just because it is a alternative to ObamaCare, doesn’t mean that it is a good one.
“By election day, it would probably un-insure ten million people.”
The goal is to be better than ObamaCare, not to sink lower.
I wonder if it guarantees access to medical care after an exorcism…
http://blow.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/28/bobby-jindal-the-exorcist-pro-or-con/
I refuse to listen to anything by that man
Yeah, just Google him doing an exercism
“It would also “guarantee access” to people with pre-existing conditions”
That is absolutely necessary
It’s too often that people can’t find coverage after a forced drop
Yes, my family has been in similar situation. But I’m not sure how Bobby Jindal can stop that..
Magic duh
I think you mean Jesus
I think you mean Jesus
Oh fantastic, uninsuring more people
It’s like Oprah except we are ruining peoples lives
I think by everyone you mean Obama
Well, at least Sebellius stepped down
Yeah, I guess that is good news
You can always count on today’s GOP to squander one opportunity after another.
Day late, dollar short.
In both the Jindal plan and the Republican study committee plan, the federal support for high risk pools is embarassingly low. (somewhere between $2.5 billion and $10 billion a year nationwide.)
Even by Heritage estimates, this is way short of what would be needed if we allowed insurance companies to underwrite again.
Is this a way to signal that these are not serious plans? Or a recognition that sick people do not constitute a voting bloc at all?