• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Obamacare 1.1

Discussion in 'American Politics' started by civilwarbuff, Jul 17, 2019.

  1. Me

  2. Not me

Results are only viewable after voting.
  1. mark46

    mark46 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,781
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Democrat
    Yes, Biden is proposing Obama 2.0 with a public option which is necessary because many states didn't implement a state option. Also, the plan has much higher subsidies that will serve to reduce premiums. And yes, this plan to change Obamacare will cost a lot, $750B, paid for by partial reversing the Trump tax cut. It has ZERO chance of being implemented since there will not be anywhere near 60 senators (not even the 50 needed when Obama used the tax ruse which cannot be used this time).

    The key thing is that Biden's plan is much, much better than the status quo, and much, much better than any Republican plan. The plan will work well in the campaign. The plans of other Democrats simply present strong Democratic advantage to the Republicans.
    ==========
    Republicans will oppose the plan as they have opposed every federal health improvement since the 30's.
    Democrats will likely support plans that cost 10-20 TRILLION and eliminate private insurance over 4 years.

     
  2. jayem

    jayem Naturalist

    +3,890
    Atheist
    Married
    As I said, states can mandate that if insurers want to sell plans in their states, they must provide certain benefits. And all I can say is that in 40+ years of working in health care, I have never encountered an insurance plan that did not cover pregnancy-related medical expenses.

    BTW: I don't mean to go off topic. But I can't imagine that any pro-life Christian would support an insurance company refusing to cover prenatal care, labor, and delivery.
     
  3. variant

    variant Happy Cat

    +4,061
    Agnostic
    Single
    Is Trump going to get around to repealing and replacing it instead? That plan fell apart when they didn't repeal the thing without replacing it.

    I don't remember any other substantive actions after that aside from crickets.
     
  4. DaisyDay

    DaisyDay blind squirrel

    +8,931
    United States
    Unitarian
    Married
    US-Others
  5. DaisyDay

    DaisyDay blind squirrel

    +8,931
    United States
    Unitarian
    Married
    US-Others
    Before 1978, there were employer plans that covered pregnancy expenses for the wives of employees, but not for the employees themselves. Women could also be fired simply for becoming pregnant. The word itself was considered not fit for polite company.
     
  6. ViaCrucis

    ViaCrucis Evangelical Catholic of the Augsburg Confession

    +15,763
    United States
    Lutheran
    In Relationship
    US-Others
    A candidate who isn't willing to fight for universal healthcare isn't a candidate that I'm going to get behind.

    The ACA was, at best, a bandaid on a massive wound.

    -CryptoLutheran
     
Loading...