Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 19, 2014, 01:19:39 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  General Politics
| |-+  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: True Federalist, Former Moderate, Badger)
| | |-+  Tinkering with the subsidy and mandate requirements
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Tinkering with the subsidy and mandate requirements  (Read 266 times)
rob in cal
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 683
View Profile
« on: June 28, 2012, 05:15:37 pm »
Ignore

Assuming you had a GOP president, house of rep, and a tiny majority in the senate, I wonder if the GOP would try to roll back the subsidy going to those forced to buy insurance, and on the other hand, make the individual mandate much less expensive by allowing for a bare bones, very high deductible, catastrophic only plan.  Would such a move require a fillibuster proof majority, or wouldn't it be just part of the annual budget writing process?
Logged
muon2
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8943


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: June 28, 2012, 06:00:39 pm »
Ignore

Since the mandate has been ruled a tax, then I see no reason that adjustments couldn't be made as part of a budgetary process.
Logged


Partial solar eclipse of October 23, 2014 with a cloud and large sunspot.
Mr. Morden
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20301
United States


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: June 28, 2012, 06:16:02 pm »
Ignore

Yes, since the mandate is a tax, they could use reconciliation to ditch the mandate without being able to be stopped by a fillibuster.  But presumably, it couldn't be used to ditch the ban on discriminating against those with preexisting conditions.  The insurance companies will lobby furiously not to ditch the mandate alone.  Whereas if the mandate had been struck down by SCOTUS, the GOP wouldn't have to worry about that, because the court would have done their dirty work for them.
Logged

HOG & Blondie: A Tale of Atlas Future

What is your opinion of this thread?

Watch Dave being briefed by the mods.

Being a moderator is basically like one giant party.  Except you're the one ruining the party and everyone hates you.
milhouse24
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2340
View Profile
« Reply #3 on: June 29, 2012, 12:59:23 pm »
Ignore

Yes, since the mandate is a tax, they could use reconciliation to ditch the mandate without being able to be stopped by a fillibuster.  But presumably, it couldn't be used to ditch the ban on discriminating against those with preexisting conditions.  The insurance companies will lobby furiously not to ditch the mandate alone.  Whereas if the mandate had been struck down by SCOTUS, the GOP wouldn't have to worry about that, because the court would have done their dirty work for them.


Even if the mandate is ditched, health care companies can still raise the premium prices to offset the risk of preexisting conditions.  Are the health care companies bound by making their premiums "actually affordable"  are they restricted in price increases by the new law?
Logged
anvi
anvikshiki
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3943
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -1.22

View Profile
« Reply #4 on: July 01, 2012, 08:48:39 am »
Ignore

Though deemed constitutional as a tax, the mandate is still unpopular.  They might be able to ditch it in exchange for means-tested subsidies or something.  If that were the only challenge, there may not be much difficulty.  But the tricky part would be getting rid of guaranteed issue (which is really popular) if they wanted to ditch community rating.  That's why I now tend to think that they could modify the community rating policy so as to allow for implicit rating by insurance companies. 
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines