Gop wants to reduce what private insurance covers and the dims want to end private insurance.

[dudmuck]

My company switched from PPO's to high deductible plans, that cost me more monthly, and have enormous deductibles.

All to pay for other people.

As many were forced to do.

Obamacare wasn't designed to help. It was designed to crater private healthcare so the next Democrat POTUS could regulate private companies out of business, and force everyone to accept the only alternative. Slavery.

DC is crawling the health industry lobbyists to ensure any legislation is to their liking (i.e. profitable)

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

There is only one way to truly fix healthcare in this country and that is to take it all the back to the way things were before the train ran off the rails. That is to get government completely out of the healthcare business and make selling insurance illegal. Nothing other than the free market is required to just costs as low as possible. I remember when people paid their own affordable bills. There is no mathematical way for insurance companies to bring anything to the equation but increased costs while it is well known that government screws up everything it touches. All you have to do is watch TV for an hour or so to see that this is all true.

If health care was not much of a problem before 2009

Why has it been considered a crisis situation for the past 50 or so years....

Truman pushed for universal healthcare, Nixon pushed for it

How can Nixon have been pushing for national healthcare if there were no issues with healthcare then?

Lessons on Universal Coverage from Richard Nixon

 

[Dana7360]

Another conservative who doesn't know the meaning of words in the English language.

Health care and insurance have absolutely nothing to do with liberty.

No, but laws mandating how we do health care and insurance have everything to do with liberty. They crush it.

Please tell me how mandating that people be responsible and have health insurance is the government persecuting someone or the government kicking them out of their native country.

 

[dblack]

What the heck does that even mean???

It means markets don’t work. You are in the ambulance going for emergency care. Where is the downward pressure on the cost?

Again, markets never "work". They simply leave us free to work things out however we like. Saying "markets don't work" is the same as saying "freedom doesn't work".

Normally markets work fine, just not in healthcare.

Again, what does it mean for a market to "work"? What does it mean for freedom to "work"?

No downward pressure on costs.

We don't currently have a free market in health care. It's manipulated and controlled by an unholy alliance between health care corporations and government. So pointing to the current situation, which ill-conceived government policy created in the first place, and insisting that the only answer is more ill-conceived government policy, is perverse in the extreme.

And you can’t explain why there would ever be downward pressure.

I've done that three or four times in this thread alone. As it is, people are either on the insurance gravy train (and don't care what health care costs because they aren't paying for it) or they don't have insurance and can't afford health care at all (and therefore also don't care what health care costs because they aren't paying for it - they either get it as charity or not at all).

Group insurance is the key problem. When you take away a consumer's responsibility to pay the bills, the simply don't give a shit how the bills add up. If we remove the incentives and subsidies that have pushed us into the group insurance trap, and people are paying for most of their health care themselves, there will definitely be downward price pressure. There will also be more political pressure to remove the regulatory stranglehold preventing low-cost health care.

And, before you go there again, no, most health care decisions aren't made in a slit-second emergency situations. And even those can be considered in advance. As it is, there's no reason to consider anything, other than staying employed because your boss controls your ability to get health care.

 

[dblack]

Another conservative who doesn't know the meaning of words in the English language.

Health care and insurance have absolutely nothing to do with liberty.

No, but laws mandating how we do health care and insurance have everything to do with liberty. They crush it.

Please tell me how mandating that people be responsible and have health insurance is the government persecuting someone or the government kicking them out of their native country.

Because having insurance isn't the only way to be responsible. In fact, having group insurance actually encourages people to be irresponsible.

 

[dblack]

If health care was not much of a problem before 2009

It's been a problem for much longer than that, as you say ...

Why has it been considered a crisis situation for the past 50 or so years....

Because our government decided to push everyone toward employer provided "*group insurance" about fifty years ago.

*not really insurance

 

[Brain357]

It means markets don’t work. You are in the ambulance going for emergency care. Where is the downward pressure on the cost?

Again, markets never "work". They simply leave us free to work things out however we like. Saying "markets don't work" is the same as saying "freedom doesn't work".

Normally markets work fine, just not in healthcare.

Again, what does it mean for a market to "work"? What does it mean for freedom to "work"?

No downward pressure on costs.

We don't currently have a free market in health care. It's manipulated and controlled by an unholy alliance between health care corporations and government. So pointing to the current situation, which ill-conceived government policy created in the first place, and insisting that the only answer is more ill-conceived government policy, is perverse in the extreme.

And you can’t explain why there would ever be downward pressure.

I've done that three or four times in this thread alone. As it is, people are either on the insurance gravy train (and don't care what health care costs because they aren't paying for it) or they don't have insurance and can't afford health care at all (and therefore also don't care what health care costs because they aren't paying for it - they either get it as charity or not at all).

Group insurance is the key problem. When you take away a consumer's responsibility to pay the bills, the simply don't give a shit how the bills add up. If we remove the incentives and subsidies that have pushed us into the group insurance trap, and people are paying for most of their health care themselves, there will definitely be downward price pressure. There will also be more political pressure to remove the regulatory stranglehold preventing low-cost health care.

And, before you go there again, no, most health care decisions aren't made in a slit-second emergency situations. And even those can be considered in advance. As it is, there's no reason to consider anything, other than staying employed because your boss controls your ability to get health care.

You aren’t making any sense. Everyone I know thinks healthcare is too expensive. There is just nothing that can be done about it.

The most expensive healthcare is never going to be shopped around for the cheapest option. When It comes to health there are few options. If you need a quadruple bypass you are going to get it. Healthcare knows this, there is no downward pressure.

You again fail to show me why there would ever be downward pressure.

 

[dblack]

Again, markets never "work". They simply leave us free to work things out however we like. Saying "markets don't work" is the same as saying "freedom doesn't work".

Normally markets work fine, just not in healthcare.

Again, what does it mean for a market to "work"? What does it mean for freedom to "work"?

No downward pressure on costs.

We don't currently have a free market in health care. It's manipulated and controlled by an unholy alliance between health care corporations and government. So pointing to the current situation, which ill-conceived government policy created in the first place, and insisting that the only answer is more ill-conceived government policy, is perverse in the extreme.

And you can’t explain why there would ever be downward pressure.

I've done that three or four times in this thread alone. As it is, people are either on the insurance gravy train (and don't care what health care costs because they aren't paying for it) or they don't have insurance and can't afford health care at all (and therefore also don't care what health care costs because they aren't paying for it - they either get it as charity or not at all).

Group insurance is the key problem. When you take away a consumer's responsibility to pay the bills, the simply don't give a shit how the bills add up. If we remove the incentives and subsidies that have pushed us into the group insurance trap, and people are paying for most of their health care themselves, there will definitely be downward price pressure. There will also be more political pressure to remove the regulatory stranglehold preventing low-cost health care.

And, before you go there again, no, most health care decisions aren't made in a slit-second emergency situations. And even those can be considered in advance. As it is, there's no reason to consider anything, other than staying employed because your boss controls your ability to get health care.

You aren’t making any sense. Everyone I know thinks healthcare is too expensive. There is just nothing that can be done about it.

The most expensive healthcare is never going to be shopped around for the cheapest option. When It comes to health there are few options. If you need a quadruple bypass you are going to get it. Healthcare knows this, there is no downward pressure.

You again fail to show me why there would ever be downward pressure.

No, you failed to read what I showed you. If people are paying for more of their own health care, there will be more downward price pressure. How can you imagine there wouldn't be?

This is anecdotal, so I don't offer it as "evidence", but I remember when I was young - my father was self employed and we had traditional insurance (now we'd call it 'catastrophic' insurance). I remember several incidents where my father negotiated with the doctor. We actually discussed the costs of various options and made decisions based, in part, on cost. And as recently as a few years ago, I've been involved in such negotiations: at the time I had high-deductible insurance and paid for most things out-of-pocket. I cared about prices and asked about them up front. And they were usually willing to bargain. Many of them preferred not dealing with insurance.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

If health care was not much of a problem before 2009

It's been a problem for much longer than that, as you say ...

Why has it been considered a crisis situation for the past 50 or so years....

Because our government decided to push everyone toward employer provided "*group insurance" about fifty years ago.

*not really insurance

Can you tell me when was this golden age of health insurance you keep referring to?

 

[Brain357]

Normally markets work fine, just not in healthcare.

Again, what does it mean for a market to "work"? What does it mean for freedom to "work"?

No downward pressure on costs.

We don't currently have a free market in health care. It's manipulated and controlled by an unholy alliance between health care corporations and government. So pointing to the current situation, which ill-conceived government policy created in the first place, and insisting that the only answer is more ill-conceived government policy, is perverse in the extreme.

And you can’t explain why there would ever be downward pressure.

I've done that three or four times in this thread alone. As it is, people are either on the insurance gravy train (and don't care what health care costs because they aren't paying for it) or they don't have insurance and can't afford health care at all (and therefore also don't care what health care costs because they aren't paying for it - they either get it as charity or not at all).

Group insurance is the key problem. When you take away a consumer's responsibility to pay the bills, the simply don't give a shit how the bills add up. If we remove the incentives and subsidies that have pushed us into the group insurance trap, and people are paying for most of their health care themselves, there will definitely be downward price pressure. There will also be more political pressure to remove the regulatory stranglehold preventing low-cost health care.

And, before you go there again, no, most health care decisions aren't made in a slit-second emergency situations. And even those can be considered in advance. As it is, there's no reason to consider anything, other than staying employed because your boss controls your ability to get health care.

You aren’t making any sense. Everyone I know thinks healthcare is too expensive. There is just nothing that can be done about it.

The most expensive healthcare is never going to be shopped around for the cheapest option. When It comes to health there are few options. If you need a quadruple bypass you are going to get it. Healthcare knows this, there is no downward pressure.

You again fail to show me why there would ever be downward pressure.

No, you failed to read what I showed you. If people are paying for more of their own health care, there will be more downward price pressure. How can you imagine there wouldn't be?

This is anecdotal, so I don't offer it as "evidence", but I remember when I was young - my father was self employed and we had traditional insurance (now we'd call it 'catastrophic' insurance). I remember several incidents where my father negotiated with the doctor. We actually discussed the costs of various options and made decisions based, in part, on cost. And as recently as a few years ago, I've been involved in such negotiations: at the time I had high-deductible insurance and paid for most things out-of-pocket. I cared about prices and asked about them up front. And they were usually willing to bargain. Many of them preferred not dealing with insurance.

Because they don’t have a choice. You can’t decide to not get emergency care. If you choose to not get that quadruple bypass the other option is death. Who’s going to choose death? There is no downward pressure unless you can walk away.

 

[RealDave]

So you prefer corporations have that power?

Corporations are voluntary associations of free people.

The solution is more freedom, not more Fascism, Government control, and subjugation.

So if a corporation decides to dump those 55 gal drums of waste into the local creek, its freedom?

 

[RealDave]

There is only one way to truly fix healthcare in this country and that is to take it all the back to the way things were before the train ran off the rails. That is to get government completely out of the healthcare business and make selling insurance illegal. Nothing other than the free market is required to just costs as low as possible. I remember when people paid their own affordable bills. There is no mathematical way for insurance companies to bring anything to the equation but increased costs while it is well known that government screws up everything it touches. All you have to do is watch TV for an hour or so to see that this is all true.

If health care was not much of a problem before 2009

Why has it been considered a crisis situation for the past 50 or so years....

Truman pushed for universal healthcare, Nixon pushed for it

How can Nixon have been pushing for national healthcare if there were no issues with healthcare then?

Lessons on Universal Coverage from Richard Nixon

You are either lying or dumber than shit.

Premiums were rising at double digit rates. People with pre-existing conditions had trouble finding coverahe & when they did, they couldn't afford it. Get sick, you got thrown off your policy. People reached their caps. The leading cause of personal bankruptcy was medical bills.

It has been a crisis since Reagan days.

 

[RealDave]

Another conservative who doesn't know the meaning of words in the English language.

Health care and insurance have absolutely nothing to do with liberty.

No, but laws mandating how we do health care and insurance have everything to do with liberty. They crush it.

Hospitals by law have to treat you when you fall off your roof & are delivered by ambulance.

Don't you think everyone needs to chip in on this? Or do you think you should be able to just show up, get treated, and not pay the bill?

Maybe we should allow hospitals to throw your broken body out because you don't have the $80K its going to take to fix you?

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

There is only one way to truly fix healthcare in this country and that is to take it all the back to the way things were before the train ran off the rails. That is to get government completely out of the healthcare business and make selling insurance illegal. Nothing other than the free market is required to just costs as low as possible. I remember when people paid their own affordable bills. There is no mathematical way for insurance companies to bring anything to the equation but increased costs while it is well known that government screws up everything it touches. All you have to do is watch TV for an hour or so to see that this is all true.

If health care was not much of a problem before 2009

Why has it been considered a crisis situation for the past 50 or so years....

Truman pushed for universal healthcare, Nixon pushed for it

How can Nixon have been pushing for national healthcare if there were no issues with healthcare then?

Lessons on Universal Coverage from Richard Nixon

You are either lying or dumber than shit.

Premiums were rising at double digit rates. People with pre-existing conditions had trouble finding coverahe & when they did, they couldn't afford it. Get sick, you got thrown off your policy. People reached their caps. The leading cause of personal bankruptcy was medical bills.

It has been a crisis since Reagan days.

I was clearly told on this post that healthcare was fine until Obama came along and did Kenyan stuff to it...

And if health care costs were rising in the past, it was still because of dems doing dem stuff...

Republicans have always believe that Americans should be free to shop for their own healthcare services -- if one healthcare provider offers 1700 bucks for a procedure, they should shop around until they find a better price...

For example...if a person has a heart attack and gets rushed to a hospital, he should be able to tell the EMTs what hospital he should go to since he knows they have lower costs there...

 

[easyt65]

Another conservative who doesn't know the meaning of words in the English language.

Health care and insurance have absolutely nothing to do with liberty.

No, but laws mandating how we do health care and insurance have everything to do with liberty. They crush it.

Please tell me how mandating that people be responsible and have health insurance is the government persecuting someone or the government kicking them out of their native country.

1. Passing a law that destroys the existing health care industry, which allows people to negotiate for what they personally need and want, and replacing it with a system based on lies, the stripping of personal choice, and that is designed to fail is somehow ok with you?

2. USSC Justice Kennedy, I believe, argued - and 4 Justices agreed with him - that giving the power to force Americans to buy a product, in this case health insurance - then allows the government to force Americans to buy ANYTHING: Condoms, tennis shoes, umbrellas, etc...

At this point Obamacare was saved by Chief Justice Roberts who injected an argument in favor of the bill that the Obama administration had not even argued - that the fundamental pillar on which Obamacare rested was a 'TAX', not a 'monetary punitive fine'. This meant that the US Govt did NOT have a right to order Americans to buy a product but could levy a tax on those who did not do so (much like how adults without school children still have to pay for public school).
*** Within the Tax Reform Bill, this 'Tax' was eliminated, effectively signaling / resulting in the death of Obamacare.

Once again, with 'Medicare-For-All' SOME of the Democrats are once again for government-overreach by seeking to make personal / private ownership of health insurance - anything OTHER THAN 'Medicare-For-All' - ILLEGAL. In this case the government is STILL mandating the American people buy 1 certain product by creating a monopoly through legislative mandate, effectively eliminating any alternative to the government run/controlled option and again threatening to judicially punish any American who refuses to comply / buy their mandated option.

The Democrats are trying to push their same Un-Constitutional plan the same way, except I don't see how they can explain / ague that making it ILLEGAL / a CRIME to own any other insurance than what they offer / control is in any way a 'TAX'. It is stripping Americans of any choice and forcing them to accept this mandated government solution (to a problem they created) / EDICT!

 

[toomuchtime_]

It served the majority of the population very well, but it did need attend to the problems of some people who were not poor enough to qualify for Medicaid and didn't have insurance from their employer. Unfortunately the Democrats chose to politicize healthcare instead of dealing with it pragmatically.

.

It served SOME of the population reasonably well...and drove hundreds of thousands into bankruptcy

Others.....just....died

Bullshit which is the stuff Obamacare was made of. The vast majority of Americans got their health insurance from their employer and polls showed they were satisfied with it. Only very poor people who were not quite poor enough to qualify for Medicaid and some people with who had pre existing conditions ran into problems, but these could easily have been resolved, as I previously pointed out to you, without a monstrosity like Obamacare. Obamacare didn't arise from the needs of the people but from the need of the Democratic Party to have a national issue.

The ACA had little effect om employee coverages. If you were actually employed, you would know that.

Millions of people without insurance IS a national issue. Premiums rising at a rate over 9% a year is a national issue.

Prior to trhe ACA, healthcare &health Insurance was financially & literally killing Americans.

For you to claim itr wasdn't is roof of your ignorance.

Pre-existing Conditions
Coverage ceilings
Canceling policies

Small employers got help. Over half of all business have fewer than 9. Self employed got major help.

As I've explained before, everyone had access to healthcare before ACA, but if they needed hospital care, they had to spend down their assets and not have much in the way of earnings to be eligible for Medicaid, but that could have been remedies by simply passing a law that raised the amount of earnings and assets slightly that applied to people who would not normally have been eligible for Medicaid if they needed hospital care. The rest of ACA was strictly political. ACA was a great success politically, but as healthcare reform, it failed to hold down costs or provide universal healthcare and the courts will probably find it was unconstitutional.

So explain again how they got checkups & went to the doctor before it became an urgent issue?

Evidently, you have no clue what the ACA does.

The ACA lowered the rate of premium increases. It insured millions more people. Burt lets throw it away because it did not cover everyone.

Comprehensive primary care has been available at HHS run clinics on a sliding scale basis for years so check ups and nearly all outpatient treatment was available was already covered and the only gap was if you needed hospital cae, which could have been handled by allowing sick people who needed hospital care but had no insurance to get Medicaid on a temporary basis while they continued to need hospital care. Obama simply lied when he claimed poor people or those with pre existing condition without insurance had no choice but to go to hospital emergency rooms. Obamacare from the start has been about politics, not about healthcare.

 

[toomuchtime_]

It served the majority of the population very well, but it did need attend to the problems of some people who were not poor enough to qualify for Medicaid and didn't have insurance from their employer. Unfortunately the Democrats chose to politicize healthcare instead of dealing with it pragmatically.

.

It served SOME of the population reasonably well...and drove hundreds of thousands into bankruptcy

Others.....just....died

Bullshit which is the stuff Obamacare was made of. The vast majority of Americans got their health insurance from their employer and polls showed they were satisfied with it. Only very poor people who were not quite poor enough to qualify for Medicaid and some people with who had pre existing conditions ran into problems, but these could easily have been resolved, as I previously pointed out to you, without a monstrosity like Obamacare. Obamacare didn't arise from the needs of the people but from the need of the Democratic Party to have a national issue.

The ACA had little effect om employee coverages. If you were actually employed, you would know that.

Millions of people without insurance IS a national issue. Premiums rising at a rate over 9% a year is a national issue.

Prior to trhe ACA, healthcare &health Insurance was financially & literally killing Americans.

For you to claim itr wasdn't is roof of your ignorance.

Pre-existing Conditions
Coverage ceilings
Canceling policies

Small employers got help. Over half of all business have fewer than 9. Self employed got major help.

As I've explained before, everyone had access to healthcare before ACA, but if they needed hospital care, they had to spend down their assets and not have much in the way of earnings to be eligible for Medicaid, but that could have been remedies by simply passing a law that raised the amount of earnings and assets slightly that applied to people who would not normally have been eligible for Medicaid if they needed hospital care. The rest of ACA was strictly political. ACA was a great success politically, but as healthcare reform, it failed to hold down costs or provide universal healthcare and the courts will probably find it was unconstitutional.

So how many states does this eligibility include? Certainly not all.

Everyone presently qualifies for Medicaid on a temporary basis if they are poor enough and sick enough, but presently you must spend down nearly all your assets and have very little income, forcing people into bankruptcy to qualify. The law could be changed to allow people to keep some assets and income while receiving Medicaid on a temporary basis so they are not financially ruined. Combined with the HHS clinics that charge sliding scale fees and provide comprehensive primary care and everyone in the US would have access to affordable healthcare. There was never any need for Obamacare. All that was needed was a few tweaks to existing systems.

 

[RealDave]

.

It served SOME of the population reasonably well...and drove hundreds of thousands into bankruptcy

Others.....just....died

Bullshit which is the stuff Obamacare was made of. The vast majority of Americans got their health insurance from their employer and polls showed they were satisfied with it. Only very poor people who were not quite poor enough to qualify for Medicaid and some people with who had pre existing conditions ran into problems, but these could easily have been resolved, as I previously pointed out to you, without a monstrosity like Obamacare. Obamacare didn't arise from the needs of the people but from the need of the Democratic Party to have a national issue.

The ACA had little effect om employee coverages. If you were actually employed, you would know that.

Millions of people without insurance IS a national issue. Premiums rising at a rate over 9% a year is a national issue.

Prior to trhe ACA, healthcare &health Insurance was financially & literally killing Americans.

For you to claim itr wasdn't is roof of your ignorance.

Pre-existing Conditions
Coverage ceilings
Canceling policies

Small employers got help. Over half of all business have fewer than 9. Self employed got major help.

As I've explained before, everyone had access to healthcare before ACA, but if they needed hospital care, they had to spend down their assets and not have much in the way of earnings to be eligible for Medicaid, but that could have been remedies by simply passing a law that raised the amount of earnings and assets slightly that applied to people who would not normally have been eligible for Medicaid if they needed hospital care. The rest of ACA was strictly political. ACA was a great success politically, but as healthcare reform, it failed to hold down costs or provide universal healthcare and the courts will probably find it was unconstitutional.

So explain again how they got checkups & went to the doctor before it became an urgent issue?

Evidently, you have no clue what the ACA does.

The ACA lowered the rate of premium increases. It insured millions more people. Burt lets throw it away because it did not cover everyone.

Comprehensive primary care has been available at HHS run clinics on a sliding scale basis for years so check ups and nearly all outpatient treatment was available was already covered and the only gap was if you needed hospital cae, which could have been handled by allowing sick people who needed hospital care but had no insurance to get Medicaid on a temporary basis while they continued to need hospital care. Obama simply lied when he claimed poor people or those with pre existing condition without insurance had no choice but to go to hospital emergency rooms. Obamacare from the start has been about politics, not about healthcare.

It is only free if you are below the FPG. You pay full if it is over twice the fpg. Most would be covered my Medicaid.

One of the purposes of the ACA was to help those not eligible for Medicaid

 

[iceberg]

Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right.

Trump asks courts to outlaw ‘Obamacare’ while claiming GOP as the ‘party of health care’

well obamacare has already been found unconstitutional.

so there's that.

 

[RealDave]

.

It served SOME of the population reasonably well...and drove hundreds of thousands into bankruptcy

Others.....just....died

Bullshit which is the stuff Obamacare was made of. The vast majority of Americans got their health insurance from their employer and polls showed they were satisfied with it. Only very poor people who were not quite poor enough to qualify for Medicaid and some people with who had pre existing conditions ran into problems, but these could easily have been resolved, as I previously pointed out to you, without a monstrosity like Obamacare. Obamacare didn't arise from the needs of the people but from the need of the Democratic Party to have a national issue.

The ACA had little effect om employee coverages. If you were actually employed, you would know that.

Millions of people without insurance IS a national issue. Premiums rising at a rate over 9% a year is a national issue.

Prior to trhe ACA, healthcare &health Insurance was financially & literally killing Americans.

For you to claim itr wasdn't is roof of your ignorance.

Pre-existing Conditions
Coverage ceilings
Canceling policies

Small employers got help. Over half of all business have fewer than 9. Self employed got major help.

As I've explained before, everyone had access to healthcare before ACA, but if they needed hospital care, they had to spend down their assets and not have much in the way of earnings to be eligible for Medicaid, but that could have been remedies by simply passing a law that raised the amount of earnings and assets slightly that applied to people who would not normally have been eligible for Medicaid if they needed hospital care. The rest of ACA was strictly political. ACA was a great success politically, but as healthcare reform, it failed to hold down costs or provide universal healthcare and the courts will probably find it was unconstitutional.

So how many states does this eligibility include? Certainly not all.

Everyone presently qualifies for Medicaid on a temporary basis if they are poor enough and sick enough, but presently you must spend down nearly all your assets and have very little income, forcing people into bankruptcy to qualify. The law could be changed to allow people to keep some assets and income while receiving Medicaid on a temporary basis so they are not financially ruined. Combined with the HHS clinics that charge sliding scale fees and provide comprehensive primary care and everyone in the US would have access to affordable healthcare. There was never any need for Obamacare. All that was needed was a few tweaks to existing systems.

So how did the ACA cover tens of millions more?

Why is it political to eliminate the pre-existing condition considerations?
Why is it political to remove caps
Why is it political to stop insurance companies from cancelling policies when people got sick
Why is it political to slow the rate of premium increases
why is it political to set certain screenings to be covered
Why is it political to allow individuals & small employers to buy as a large group

My health insurer quoted me $1850 a month (my wife & I) the years exchanges opened,. I bought an equivalent policy for $900. no subsidies.

That had NOTHING political about it.