194
Donald Trump Still Wants to Kill Obamacare. Why?
(www.nytimes.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2023
194 points (93.7% liked)
politics
19082 readers
3281 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
In other words, it has flaws that need to be addressed but we've been too busy defending it to have the political capital to do it. We knew there would be some losers, but not nearly as many as before and ten years later costs are actually lower than the CBO projected.
It's undeniable that it did help people. I'm never going to object to that fact. The reason I don't think it's good is because it didn't do much for the poorest people in the country, the people the bill was meant to help
It was also meant to help people with "pre-existing conditions." Which it has, immensely. Prior to ACA one could not leave, or it was prohibitively expensive to leave the health insurer one had when first diagnosed with a chronic condition, and therefore could also be unable to leave an employer if said employer provided health insurance. Further, one could hit a payment cap and then be uninsurable, and if a payment was missed one would get dropped and then became uninsurable. I'm guessing millions if not tens of millions now have insurance who otherwise would not. Plans are subsidized based on income which is helpful.
And I'm not disagreeing with you. I will however point out there is Medicaid for the poorest.
… and some of the most needy who were missed, were a few Republican states refusing money to expand their Medicaid programs