health care

Now That He's Found It, Rand Paul Really Doesn't Like GOP's Obamacare Repeal Bill

Rand: "This is Obamacare light. It will not pass."

|

Van Tine Dennis/ABACA USA/Newscom

House Republican leaders on Monday night unveiled their plan to repeal and replace—or at least modify—the Affordable Care Act, and the bill is drawing negative reviews from U.S. Sen. Rand Paul.

Paul (R–Ken.) took to Twitter and made an appearance on Fox News on Tuesday morning to slam the House GOP health care bill and predict its demise.

"This is Obamacare light. It will not pass. Conservatives are not going to take it," Paul told Fox & Friends. He said the bill will "do nothing" to bring health care costs down or to restrict the steady rise of premiums.

On Twitter, the libertarian-ish senator offered a beat-by-beat takedown of the House Republican bill, attacking it for keeping several elements of the Affordable Care Act intact, including subsidies for buying insurance (which would become a refundable tax credit in the House GOP plan) and the so-called "Cadillac Tax" on top notch insurance plans (that 40 percent tax on employer-sponsored health care plans worth more than $10,000 is supposed to take effect in 2020, but would be delayed until 2025 in the House GOP plan).

"We should be stopping mandates, taxes, and entitlements, not keeping them," Paul tweeted.

Paul was critical of the House GOP health care effort even before the bill was published. Last week, he led reporters on a search for the health care bill, crossing from the Senate side of the Capitol to the basement room on the House side of the complex where the bill supposedly was being drafted. He was turned away at the door by a House Republican staffer.

When a draft version of the bill leaked on Friday, Paul called the proposed tax credits "a new entitlement program." The tax credits are shaping up to the be the most controversial part of the bill for many conservative members of Congress (read Peter Suderman's analysis of the tax credits and the rest of the bill here).

Paul was first elected to the U.S. Senate in 2010, as part of a national wave of conservative and libertarian-minded Republicans who built their campaigns around opposition to the Affordable Care Act. Paul and Rep. Mark Meadows (R-North Carolina) stressed that history in a joint op-ed published Tuesday at Fox News.

"Republicans across America ran on repealing the Big Government takeover of our health care system that is ObamaCare. Opposition to ObamaCare helped the GOP win the House in 2010, the Senate in 2014, and the White House in 2016. Repealing ObamaCare has been a key facet of all our recent victories," they wrote.

Paul and Meadows argue that the Affordable Care Act should be repealed, in full, before a replacement bill is passed. The House Republican plan is an attempt to repeal some parts of the law while replacing others simultaneously.

That approach, Paul and Meadows said, would be tantamount to "ObamaCare provisions dressed up in shiny new GOP-branded clothes" and "would mean the loss of too many conservative votes for passage."

Advertisement

NEXT: Snuggies Are Blankets, Not Clothes

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. It’s times like this I’m glad Rand didn’t get the GOP nomination, because I think he would’ve lost to Hillary.

    He’s way too valuable to lose in the Senate.

    1. Particularly when it is 52-48

      1. And that won’t hold in 2018. Unless Trump and the GOP work some magic in the next year or so they will be losing seats in the next elections.

        1. Eh i dont know. The senate looks bad for the dems. We shall see

        2. I honestly don’t think so, no matter how bad Trump is. The Senate map is the absolute worst nightmare for the Dems.

          The Republicans are only defending 8 states: Mississippi, Nebraska, Tennessee, Utah, Wyoming, Arizona, Texas, and Nevada. Only Nevada voted Hillary in the last election, but Heller is pretty popular there. That is the Dems’ most likely pickup. Arizona is the next possibility, and then Texas, which is just barely possible. Trump won the other 5 by over 18%.

          The Dems on the other hand are defending 25 seats, including 10 in states that Trump won. Five of them he won by double digits: Indiana, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota and West Virginia.

          The best Democrats could hope for is a 2-seat swing, which would make 50-50 and give Pence the tiebreaker. It is more likely that Republicans get a supermajority (which even I don’t want) than the Democrats winning the Senate back.

          The House will likely flip, but not nearly as bad as 2010. All of the Democrats screaming about Hillary winning the popular vote are ignoring that the Republicans won the national House vote by 1.5 million in a presidential election year, where Dems tend to do better.

          1. I am skeptical of a house flip. People hate congress but love their congressman.

            1. I normally agree but if the DNC figures out how to take the protests and marches and turn it in to votes they will have a shot at flipping the script, regardless of the Senate map. There are a lot of people from the left that are more energized about “fighting back” or whatever than there have been in a long time.

              I realize this is a HUGE “If” but no one thought the Tea Party was going to be that effective, and look what happened.

          2. I also don’t want a Republican supermajority, but could console myself partially with all of the liberal tears…

    2. If Trump won, I’m pretty sure Rand could have won.

      1. ^True this

      2. Almost any of the GOP nominees could have won.

        1. ^True that too

      3. He wouldn’t have even come close.

        Trump ran on a protectionist, mercantilist, nationalist platform. Sure, all his SJW-bashing was fun to watch – he’s very ‘transgressive’, but the sad fact is that most Americans are extremely ignorant about politics and are heavily swayed by rhetoric and don’t pay attention to actions.

        So you get a guy who says he’s going to fix everything – in a way that these people like, because all the others said they were going to fix everything also – and give you more free shit.

        Paul said the free shit train had to stop – ain’t no one wants to hear that.

        1. ^ what Ag said. The main reason Paul didn’t get the nomination in the first place is he told the truth and no one wanted to hear that.

          Paul has too much integrity to just tell people what they want to hear so he will get elected, which is what makes me so relieved he’s still in the Senate.

        2. Sadly I agree. This is the place where Trump’s prior Democrat affiliation didn’t hurt him. He was able to credibly assert that he would not touch SS, or Medicare.

          Paul would have been tarred up and down over his anti entitlement rhetoric and it would have scared away enough “Reagan Democrats” in key states to give Hillary the win.

        3. How many people would have still voted for Hillary if Trump didn’t get the nomination?

        4. Except me!

          1. My “except me” reply was to Agamemnon’s “Paul said the free shit train had to stop – ain’t no one wants to hear that” comment.

        5. Trump ran on a protectionist, mercantilist, nationalist platform.

          Yeah, but he won because he isn’t Hillary. Nobody gave a shit what he had to say.

          -jcr

      4. I doubt it. Trump’s populist economic BS wooed the rust belt union members. Rand would have never gotten those votes.

        1. Disagree. 7.8 million people voted third party in 2016 because Trump vs. Clinton. That’s more third party voters in one presidential election since Perot. Of those third party voters, 4.5 million went for GayJay. I doubt many of those votes were from disgruntles Bernie Bros, because they still had Jill Stein (and Bernie got a hundred thousand write in votes to boot.)

          If Rand had won the nomination, most of those Johnson votes would have gone to Rand or almost any other GOP candidate.

    3. I’m sorry, what value? I see absolutely no value in having Rand in Congress. Oh, he may occasionally offer a small quip that alludes to some faction of libertarianism. But make no mistake, he is 100% beholden to his republican overlords. He made that abundantly clear when he voted to confirm Sessions, and then moments later posted a blurb on Facebook trying to justify his decision. He is a Pol like all other Pols; in it only for themselves (and inner-circle) and not for the best of the country.

      1. He is also a doctor and would naturally be opposed to anything that might reduce his income. Anything that allows people to become even partly able to take care of their own health through being able to buy the medication needed will be opposed by the medical profession. The professions are very “protective” of their government enforced legal monopolies that give them incomes well above the free market level.

        1. He does a good deal of charity work, & he opposes mandates such as involving vaccinations. He’s against laws that would restrict competition in health care. I don’t see him as likely to resume medical practice full time anyway. He’s about the opposite of what you wrote.

        2. He’s a doctor, but much of his income comes from things that aren’t covered by health care insurance.

      2. So what you’re saying is that Rand is a Republican?

        Who knew!

    4. Hopefully in the future we get a few more like him in congress and the Senate. Right now Paul, Mike Lee and Ted Cruz are enough to kill this republican establishment bill in the senate.

  2. Has there been any positive response to this bill?

    1. Rand hates it.
      Are you sure?
      I’m Hiv positive.

      1. I was just about to do a “sorry to hear..” when my palm hit my forehead and went I went “Doh!”

        Almost got me.

        1. That’s exactly why I never say I’m sorry.

          1. +1 1970 Ali MacGraw. Would.

            1. I never said I loved you.

  3. Related:
    “Republican Congressman Advises Poor Americans to Choose Healthcare Over a New iPhone”
    http://www.sfgate.com/entertai…..982774.php

    Imagine suggesting people prioritize their spending! The HORROR!

    1. People be dumb.

    2. OMG people have to make decisions and prioritize things in their life?

      It’s like my proggy roommate saying well he shouldn’t have to choose between going back to school (and living with his dad which he does not like), or staying at a job that he does not like. How entitled

      1. Old Tim Allen joke – women have all sorts of choices – have a career, have a spouse, have a family, etc. Men have two choices – get a job or go to jail.

    3. Yup, you don’t buy an IPhone every month, you can have health care that month.
      Imagine that.

      1. MarconiDarwin|3.7.17 @ 12:35PM|#
        “Yup, you don’t buy an IPhone every month, you can have health care that month.
        Imagine that.”

        WOOSH!
        Thanks for stopping by; amusement is always welcome.

      2. I bought a phone for $30 and pay $10/month for it. No one who has money problem should be buying an iPhone or any phone costing over $50 at most.

        1. Hell, my smartphone was “free”. In that they gave me more in promotional discounts for the phone service then the phone I bought cost in the first place.

        2. No one who has money problem should be buying an iPhone or any phone costing over $50 at most.

          I presume that was sarcasm, or your IQ is somewhere south of 75.

          Either way, $50 a month ? never mind $50 total ? not only isn’t going to buy heath insurance worth squat, it won’t even make a bloody dent in it. That’s why the ACA provides subsidies. So people could actually get health insurance.

          it was an incredibly stupid thing to say. Of course, we’re talking about Jason Chaffetz, so describing something he said as “incredibly stupid” is outright redundant.

          1. It all adds up you know.

            And $50 a month can get a younger person on to a pre-paid concierge medical plan like they have at Atlas Medical in Wichita Kansas (And many other places). Sure, you still need catastrophic, but that’s all you need in addition to qualify under Obamacare. If you have a place that offers the same service as Atlas (We have them in Dallas), then you essentially have an all you can eat buffett for a doctor, including anything they can do in office (including EKGs and PET scans I believe), and they sell you medicine at their cost, because they make their money $50 a month per person, and don’t have to have a ton of staff for insurance and medicaid compliance.

            But hey! Drop $50+ on phones and wonder why you don’t have any money at the end of the month… Can’t be that you’re spending money on things you shouldn’t because you can’t really afford it!

            Again, it all adds up. Little things pile on little things and before you know it, you’ve frittered away a small fortune by living beyond your means.

    4. “The increased cost of health insurance is a central fact in any discussion of health policy and health delivery. Annual premiums reached $18,142 in 2016 for an average family.” http://www.ncsl.org/research/h…..miums.aspx I think that’s *slightly* more expensive than a phone…

      1. “Who knew health care would be so complicated?”

        Donald Trump – Feb 25, 2017.

        1. Turd:
          “Hey, look over THERE!”
          Stupidity is soooo predictable.

      2. “…I think that’s *slightly* more expensive than a phone…”
        WOOSH!
        Thanks for stopping by; amusement is always welcome.

      3. It’s more expensive than a car and half a mortgage payment.

    5. Do IPhones cost $700 a month, and if you use one, another $5000 extra?

      1. You can get an iPhone 5 for about $180 now I think.

  4. Oh, this shit will pass, have no fear, Rand. I just hope Rand becomes fed up with his own party finally and turns into a defiant Dr. No, Jr.

    1. Only libertarians are that unrealistic

  5. Where is the article on the new CIA leaks? Chop, chop, Reason.

    1. It’s kinda funny that this is a thing.

      1. What is?

      2. Are you talking about the expression “chop chop”? Apparently it is Cantonese in origin.

      1. Vault 7

        Warning: NSFGG (Not Safe For Government Goons – link is to wikileaks)

        1. It has nothing to do with how awful Trump is, so you’ll have to go elsewhere if you want coverage.

  6. And like every other Republican he’ll end up voting on a bizarre compromise.
    For country, Rand will do it for country.

    Hey, how about holding that debt ceiling hostage? Remember how important that was?

    1. As Cheney said “Deficits don’t matter” when there is a GOPer in the White House.

      1. Always BOOOOOOOOSH, isn’t it, turd?

      2. Kind of like Obama then?

        1. Obama was for the sequester before he was against it.

        2. No, Obama reduced the deficit significantly

  7. Where are the goddamn Tea-baggers today? We’re looking at a $1 trillion infrastructure bill, a new national healthcare bill, yuuge military spending, a new border adjustment tax, and new run-up in entitlement (Medicare) spending.

    1. Arent you a fan of democrats? Those sound appealing to dems particularly infra and entitlements

      1. Fuck no. I want small government.

        As I have said for eight years our best chance is GRIDLOCK. Fuck the GOP when they are in full power too – they are slightly worse than Democrats.

          1. I’m also for free trade and I put most of the blame for the failure of TPP on those three populist proggy bitchs I hate so much – Liz Warren, Bernie Sanders, and DJT.

            Dems knifed Obama in the back.

        1. And yet you are *for* the PPACA as it is currently implemented. You are *for* the executive’s ability to modify the burden compliance with that law has on businesses with the wave of a pen.

          Pretty much every statement you’ve made since you’ve been here has been pro-Democratic policy – no matter what that policy was – and anti-Republican. Except for the situations where Obama carried on and expanded on the policies of his predecessor – and then all of a sudden those policies were good while Bush was still horrible for doing the same thing.

          C’mon man – you’re not for small government. You’re for Democratic control of a large government. You always have been.

          1. Ridiculous. The ACA is no burden on business. Any small business (less than 50 employees) is exempt therefore their burden is zero.

            Large businesses already comply. And if you’re in the middle and don’t offer employees are group plan that they pay for – then you are a scumbag.

            I would alter the ACA considerably if I could. No mandates for one.

            1. Large business comply – except for those politically favored ones that asked for and received exemptions from compliance because of the burden placed on them.

              I guess you forgot about those guys.

    2. They’re busy wanking off Trump.

    3. In fairness, the “Tea Baggers” (Club for Growth, Americans for Prosperity, Heritage Action, etc.) have overwhelmingly come out against Ryancare or whatever you want to call it. But *as a practical matter* opposing Ryancare from the right has the same effect as opposing it from the left–Obamacare in its present form stays. I don’t say that’s what these groups want. They have their own ideas–but those ideas have no chance of passing.

    4. ~75% of infrastructure spending is state and local.

      It should be 100%.

      http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/re…..l-analysis

      So, I think it is good policy to freeze federal funding, assuming you can’t eliminate it.

      Federal highway and transit funding is $54B/year. If there is $1T in needed investment, it’s pretty silly to look to the Feds for it.

    5. The black guy is out of office. Their job is done

      1. They didn’t care that he was black,. They just didn’t like that he was a pinko red.

  8. OT: Re this “day without a woman” march/protest thingy.

    I’d like to state my support and suggest we make it a week or a month without a woman (with an option to extend).

  9. I like the stand by paul but getting rid of it is i suspect wont pass and if it does means the dems take over and go singlepayer

    1. All they have to do is let Obamacare die in that gol-dern DEATH SPIRAL! Peanuts keep telling me about.

      1. Are you a fan of obamacare? And what would be your recommendation?

        1. I like Obamacare as an Iron Wall against single-payer (Medicare for all). I like the marketplace. I like the cost containment stuff (IPAB – or “death panels”).

          I hate the mandates. ACA was the least worst of the options available.

          1. There were options?

          2. And there you have it. Something must be done, even if that something is a massive failure. That way, you can point at it and say ‘see, we did something’!

            What enumerated power of the Federal Government let it stick it’s nose into one of the biggest industries in the United States and effectively nationalize it? At it’s base level it’s unconstitutional and never, in the history of the world, has expanding access to a good without increasing it’s supply had a good end. Ever.

            The level of incompetence at the national level we’ve seen over the past 8 years is beyond staggering when even base common sense shows how wrong-headed and impossible the goals of the left are. That includes you, by the way, PB.

        2. He is. His recommendation has been that it doesn’t go far enough and healthcare should be nationalized.

          1. Shut up, you fucking liar. I regret providing a thoughtful reply upthread. Liars are not worth it.

            1. What thoughtful reply? The one where you contradicted yourself?

  10. “This is Obamacare light. It will not pass. Conservatives are not going to take it,” Paul told Fox & Friends.

    Conserva-whats? What-atives? Cons-what-ives?

  11. What does Rand say about the other huge health insurance subsidy that has been around for decades: employer-provided health insurance?

    1. “subsidy” usually implies “government”, yes/no?

      1. The subsidy is from the federal tax code. Employers deduct the expense of employee health insurance but employees have zero tax liability for that part of their compensation. The U.S. has not really had anything close to a free market for health care or health insurance since employer-provided health insurance became so popular – it dominates the system (along with Medicare – which is pretty much a single-payer hybrid system).

        1. Good point. Medical insurance should be a straight tax deduction for all or for none.

          BTW, I saw Rand Paul making this very point a day or two ago. He pushed that all people should get a tax deduction for their Insurance premiums, not just those who get it through work.

        2. And lo and behold, what caused employer provided health insurance to spring into being in the first place? If you guessed ‘price & wage controls imposed by the government at the turn of the century’ you win a prize!

          So you see, what we really need is a top down solution to all the problems generated by the last top down government solution. What’s so hard to understand about that?

          /sarc

        3. It looks like Paul’s stated plan directly accounts for this: http://www.randpaul.com/news/obamacar…..-rand-paul

          In addition to treating them equally from a tax perspective, using HSA funds on insurance premiums along with the ability for more associations to group up and get group insurance rates, would definitely sever the connection to employers providing health insurance.

    2. If they were smart, they would just move the favorable tax treatment for insurance premiums to *individuals* and . . . then just walk away.

      All your medical insurance costs are tax-free, you find your own insurance, you keep it regardless of where you’re working at – so no more ‘I have to keep this crappy job to keep treatment of this medical condition’ – and that’s it.

      Let the market sort out prices.

      Bonus points if the get rid of the ‘can’t sell insurance across state/country borders’ bullshit to make the market even more efficient.

    3. I wanted to ask the same question when I saw the opposition to the “Cadillac tax.” I’m not saying it, or any tax, is great. However, the idea that some workers should receive tax-free income that millions of others will never be able to access doesn’t seem very libertarian or conservative to me. Don’t know how it is economically sound, either. The people who need healthcare and can’t get it, work in jobs that don’t offer it. There’s been a tax benefit for 70 years, so obviously those employers and industries have chosen it’s better business to not offer it. It’s a bad idea all around to tie health insurance to employment. There’s nothing “free market” at all by saying if you don’t work for preferred employers in certain industries you not only have to pay more for healthcare but also miss out on tax breaks.

    4. Until recently, that was a benefit that companies offered to attract quality people. It was voluntary, so why should he say anything about it?

  12. Just give everyone a tax credit, then raise rates to make it ‘revenue neutral’. We have way too many deductions and credits when what really matters is the bottom line of who pays how much.

    1. Why make it revenue-neutral? Take any chance you can to cut taxes, any taxes.

  13. If eliminating the individual mandate and getting rid of ObamaCare’s Medicaid expansion is the worst case scenario, then we’re in pretty good shape.

    Much better shape than we would have been if Hillary were in office and the Democrats were in control of the Senate.

    I hope Rand Paul wins some more concessions from the establishment Republicans; I just hope we don’t end up in a situation where there’s nothing left to do but pass a spending bill to keep things as they are with both the individual mandate and the Medicare expansion completely intact.

    1. LOL. Getting rid of the mandate is not deficit neutral. Punting on Medicaid expansion is kicked down the road. Oh, the Cadillac tax is coming back.

      AND, there is no CBO score on the damn plan.

      Much better shape than we would have been if Hillary were in office and the Democrats were in control of the Senate.

      BWAHAHAHAHAHA!

      1. “Getting rid of the mandate is not deficit neutral.”

        Neither is genocide for welfare recipients. Still, we’re against genocide for being fundamentally un-libertarian.

        You know what else is fundamentally un-libertarian?

        The individual mandate.

        Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton promised on the campaign trail to reform ObamaCare with her “public option”, which si the road to single payer. If you don’t think we libertarians are better off now on ObamaCare than we would have been with Hillary in office, then you don’t anything about libertarianism.

  14. Rand is not the hard core libertarian that his father “Dr. No” [whom I admired greatly] is, but Rand is firm enough to want something much better than the nibbling at the edges plan of the big government “republican” appeasers who have forgotten the limitations outlined in the constitution

  15. Get govt completely our of healthcare. Let the FREE market handle everything, including insurance companies, doctors’ licenses, everything. Those who cannot afford it can get charities (even from real doctors and nurses). Free agencies like “united laboratories” can grade doctors and clinics etc. for the public to judge their quality.

    Here in Mexico, the govt. has IMSS which is free for me and cost very little for everyone else. But, I often go to private doctors and clinics and pay as little as $2 for a visit. Lab tests and medicines are mostly WITHOUT prescriptions. That is why there is so much “medical-dental tourism here! Big Brother, leave us alone!

    1. Free market medicine requires that there be no prescription laws, no laws against importing medical drugs for your own use. Freedom to consult whoever I chose. Of course the medical profession hates ideas like this. The AMA was founded back in 1847 with the express purpose of getting a government enforced monopoly over access to health care. Took them 90 years to do it.

  16. It isn’t Obamacare light, it’s Trumpcare. Get your terminology right. Just because you don’t like Democrats still doesn’t mean you get to name Republican healthcare plans after them. Who knows? Maybe it’ll be great.

  17. I wish they wouldn’t keep describing him as libertarian-ish, just because he doesn’t match the model of some radical libertarians.

  18. I know conservatives hate the ideas–socialized medicine, universal healthcare, and public option. But why? Conservative values work if everyone’s responsible. Problem is the irresponsible make conservative ideas on healthcare impossible. They beat us every time on health care because no human being with a conscience, let alone a doctor, will let an irresponsible person die or remain critically ill. So we have only one choice–in my opinion. Conservatives must participate fully in a public option–make sure it’s excellent and cost effective. And make sure we use the hell out it, because we’re paying for it… all of it. Then supplement with private insurance–to offer more choices and better options. There is no reason why the responsible should pay more and receive less than the irresponsible. California gave Medicaid to illegal immigrants–we have to face that fact. Obama gave Medicaid to refugees. Hospitals give emergency Medicaid to any person who walks in needing emergency care. We, the responsible, pay 4 times what we should because half of people in America are irresponsible or exploitative, health insurance companies are unnecessary middle men after their buck, and the complex billing systems that charge everybody who pays a different mystery price costs an added 15-20% Add in another 5% to tax accountant fees with Obamacare lite.

  19. We need a national health plan (a public option) available to all people providing low-cost basic and catastrophic healthcare?rich and poor–without monthly premiums. This public option replaces Medicare, Medicaid, and VA care. Alongside this, we need a robust private health insurance industry that has zeros ties to government. Here’s how to pay for the public option: (1) Drug companies and medical device companies need to put some skin in the game as part of their research and development. (2) ALL patients put a little skin in the game by cash at-time-of-service payments that are roughly equivalent of co-payments that most current insurance companies require. (3) Costs can be further controlled by coordinating healthcare with university and training hospitals and by placing a greater reliance on urgent care clinics, telemedicine, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners. (4) We need to tap into 21st century tools to save costs–like developing phone apps that direct people to the most appropriate and cost-effective treatment centers, keeping emergency rooms open for true emergencies. (5) We need Internet screening tools directing people to specialists rather than indirectly routing through primary care doctors. One healthcare plan for ALL means we all contribute. Shared responsibility along with shared privileges will keep costs down. It’s a conservative version of the liberal idea of universal care. In the following post is a preliminary plan.

    1. Or a true free market for health care and insurance.

  20. Basic-Catastrophic Health Care for America

    Basic health care: no monthly premiums, $25 co-pay per visit, $250 co-pay per hospital visit?balance paid by federal and state tax?delivered at clinics, offices, and hospitals under contract with federal and state government.
    ? Emergency care, urgent care, yearly preventative visits, prenatal care, child delivery, child health, disease management, outpatient behavioral health care.
    ? Control costs through best practice policies; increased use of urgent care clinics, nurse practitioners, generic drugs, master’s level therapists, internet health care, and telemedicine.

    Catastrophic health care: no monthly premiums, $25 co-pay per visit, $250 co-pay per hospital visit?balance paid for by private medical device and drug companies?delivered at university hospitals and other hospitals under contract with private companies to simultaneously study safety and efficacy of devices and drugs with the goal of reaching “best practices” status (then coverage shifts to basic care).
    ? Major surgery (cardiovascular, internal, rehabilitative, organ transplant).
    ? Treatment of chronic progressive disease (e.g., Alzheimer’s disease, cancer, HIV-related syndromes).

    Supplemental private insurance or employer?administered by private doctors, clinics, and hospitals?replaces, supplements, and expands basic care.
    ? Provides an alternative to basic care.
    ? Can include laser and aesthetic surgery, medical spa treatments, etc.

    1. Sounds catastrophic for the budget.

  21. just before I saw the receipt that said $7527 , I accept that my mom in-law wiz like actually making money in there spare time from there pretty old laptop. . there aunt had bean doing this for less than twenty months and at present cleared the dept on there apartment and bout a great new Citroen CV . look here…..
    _________________+_+_+_+_+… .. https://www.cashneways.com

  22. My Uncle Nolan recently got Infiniti G Sedan by working part-time from a macbook… go to
    the website…………. https://tinyurl.com/5days-job

  23. Conservatives, by nature, are not defenders of liberty — they are defenders of tradition.
    In the USA, there has been a tradition of liberty, which explains the overlap.

    But Obamacare has been around a while — don’t expect conservatives to dismantle it.

  24. The only thing worse than a big government, nanny state, tax and spend, progressive, socialist Democrat is a big government, nanny state, tax and spend, progressive, socialist Republican.

    1. No, a borrow and spend Republican is what’s doing this

  25. Okay one day is up. Time for reason.com to move to how this is horrible but because it’ll fail faster it is still better than Obamacare and start worshipping Trump.

    Come on, you can do it

  26. as Joel said I’m alarmed that some people can get paid $8414 in a few weeks on the internet . visit this site right here…………. {{{{{ http://www.cash-review.com }}}}}

  27. Good morning, keep the spirit! and respect the process, not results ^^
    https://goo.gl/2VnVVp

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.