{"id":107764,"date":"2014-02-11T07:45:29","date_gmt":"2014-02-11T12:45:29","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/uncategorized\/the-republican-agenda-on-health-care.php"},"modified":"2014-02-11T07:45:29","modified_gmt":"2014-02-11T12:45:29","slug":"the-republican-agenda-on-health-care","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/health-care\/the-republican-agenda-on-health-care.php","title":{"rendered":"The Republican Agenda on Health Care"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>    Those interested in the future of health care reform should    definitely check out Andrew Sprungs what if? piece on    what Republicans would actually do if they had    the chance after 2016. Sprung talks to three economists to    get a sense of it. Its an outstanding article.  <\/p>\n<p>    The first thing to note is that repeal is, in fact, dead.    Theres simply no way to go back to the status quo ante. And in    fact, hardly anyone would want to, including conservative    policy wonks.  <\/p>\n<p>    What I took away from the piece, however, was a bit different    than that. It was that Republicans may be constrained by their    own rhetoric into framing whatever they would want to do to    improve (from their point of view) the new system as repeal    and replace, even if the replace part of it basically just    revives the things they are repealing.  <\/p>\n<p>    In other words  no one is going to simply shut down the    exchanges (at least in the states where they are working, which    will likely be the overwhelming majority of the states). No one    is going to push young people off of their parents plans (or,    to be more precise, allow insurance companies to do so). The    Affordable Care Act was a large and complex law; there are all    sorts of provisions in there that people now rely on and plan    around, and for the most part no one is going to want to cause    the disruptions that pure repeal would produce.  <\/p>\n<p>    And yet there are quite a few conservative reforms which could    certainly build on the structure thats now in place. Some of    those reforms, as Sprung details, many liberals and liberal    policy experts would be perfectly happy with. Some others    wouldnt actually work well in practice, regardless of their    rhetorical repeal. But the point is that a serious Republican    Party would have an active health care agenda. It just wont    (really) involve eliminating the ACA, just as the ACA itself    didnt eliminate lots and lots of previous reforms and    policies.  <\/p>\n<p>    However, activists within the Republican Party are simply not    going to accept building on Obamacare as a platform, at least    not any time soon. What that means is that policy makers are    going to have to, essentially, disguise building on Obamacare    as repeal and replace. Which has two problems. One is that it    may add considerable otherwise unnecessary policy complexity.    The other is that its going to be vulnerable to charges that    it doesnt fully repeal Obamacare -- because it wont!    Remember, for example, the revolt against Eric Cantors bill to    expand high-risk pools because they were tainted by their    inclusion in the ACA. The problem is that President Barack    Obama basically told the truth when he said that the Democratic    bill included many Republican ideas, which means that there are    relatively few pure conservative ideas available that have no    association at all with the dreaded Kenyan socialist.  <\/p>\n<p>    Now, its certainly possible that if Republicans really do    capture the White House, the Senate and the House in 2016 that    theyll forget all about that when they prepare health care    legislation, and actually just pass a straightforward bill.    They can always repeal the exchanges and replace them with    Ronald Reagan Free Enterprise Private Insurance Access Points,    and then move on to the sorts of things that conservative    reformers want to add to Obamacare. And with a Republican in    the White House, its very possible that activists and the    conservative press will go along.  <\/p>\n<p>    Its also possible that the risks of further health care reform    will be relatively low-priority for most Republicans; they may    be perfectly happy to have a Democratic filibuster kill    something, and then move on to tax cuts or some other    lower-risk, higher priority policy. In fact, that would be my    bet. Health policy is hard, and Im not convinced that    Republicans are anywhere close to ready to tackle it, or that    they have all that much of an electoral incentive to do so.  <\/p>\n<p>    To contact the writer of this article:    <a href=\"mailto:Jbernstein62@bloomberg.net\">Jbernstein62@bloomberg.net<\/a>.  <\/p>\n<p>    To contact the editor responsible for this article: Tobin    Harshaw at <a href=\"mailto:tharshaw@bloomberg.net\">tharshaw@bloomberg.net<\/a>.  <\/p>\n<p><!-- Auto Generated --><\/p>\n<p>Read more here:<\/p>\n<p><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.bloomberg.com\/news\/2014-02-10\/the-republican-agenda-on-health-care.html\" title=\"The Republican Agenda on Health Care\">The Republican Agenda on Health Care<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> Those interested in the future of health care reform should definitely check out Andrew Sprungs what if? piece on what Republicans would actually do if they had the chance after 2016. Sprung talks to three economists to get a sense of it.  <a href=\"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/health-care\/the-republican-agenda-on-health-care.php\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"limit_modified_date":"","last_modified_date":"","_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-107764","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-health-care"],"modified_by":null,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/107764"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=107764"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/107764\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=107764"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=107764"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=107764"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}