Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

GOP’s Graham & Cassidy Propose Another Obamacare Lite Plan

Written by:

Published on: September 20, 2017

Once again, Republicans are looking to “replace” Obamacare, instead of repealing the disastrous unconstitutional legislation, using a proposal drafted by Senators Lindsay Graham (R-SC) and Bill Cassidy (R-LA).

Republicans failed to get their version of Obamacare passed.

Dubbed Ryancare or Trumpcare, the unconstitutional Republican version read like Obamacare “lite.”

Unfortunately, the proposal by Graham and Cassidy doesn’t read any better.

While the proposed legislation repeals the individual mandate penalty, the employer mandate penalty, ends expansion of Medicaid, and ends taxes on medical devices, the plan places the “system” under “control” by the States.

However, the federal government establishes the rules of operation under Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), provides funds to the States for the program, and determines how States may use the funds.

So, instead of “Big Daddy” federal government alone in health care insurance, the people will have “Big Mommy” State government meddling as well.

The biggest flaws in this plan keeps the Internal Revenue Service involved, does not repeal a mandate for individuals to have health care insurance – only the penalty, does not address the employer mandate – only the penalty, does not address the Independent Payment and Advisory Board (IPAB) or “death panels”, and keeps some form of government involved in healthcare insurance.

There is no provision for a full repeal and return to health care insurance provided under a private sector industry.

When Obamacare passed, with not one Republican vote, then implemented in all its notoriety, many conservative constitutionalists issued multiple warnings on this government take-over of the healthcare insurance industry.

Make no mistake – that is exactly what happened.

Warnings included exposure of the payment and advisory board, aka “death panels,” that rewrote accepted medical guidelines for preventative diagnostic procedures that would lead to the deaths of older Americans as well as the increasing unaffordable nature of the plan through exponentially increase in premiums and outlandish deductibles.

Republicans, begging for and attaining a majority in both houses to stop Obama, failed in the last years of the Obama administration to repeal the unconstitutional law in its entirety.

With the election of Donald Trump as the 45th president, the people were hopeful Republicans could now repeal the atrocious legislation and restore a private sector healthcare insurance industry.

Alas, it has not happened because Republicans moved to pass “their” version of government controlled healthcare insurance.

With the failure of Ryancare, Republicans are scrambling to get their version of government-sanctioned health care insurance passed since Bernie Sanders’ proposal of a single-payer system run by the federal government is gaining in popularity among Democrats.

Moreover, if Republicans can rally this forward now, it means the Senate needs 51 votes to pass this atrocity instead of the required 60 votes.

The Blaze reported:

Between now and Sept. 30, Republicans can pass a healthcare bill through the Senate with only 51 votes through budget reconciliation. After that, due to a procedural ruling, it would take 60 votes.

Why is that important? Because Republicans obviously aren’t getting 60 votes since Democrats universally oppose a repeal of Obamacare. But they could at least feasibly get to 50, which would allow Vice President Mike Pence to cast a tie-breaking vote in favor of the measure.

Congress is only in session three days this week, so this will likely come down to the final week of the month, which is open only because the government funding bill was passed earlier than normal. GOP leadership prefers to use the extra time on tax reform, but some Republican senators aren’t willing to let Obamacare repeal go.

Cassidy estimates that they have 49 votes in favor of the bill.

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders dropped his “Medicare for All” plan on the world last week, proposing a plan for the federal government to become the only healthcare provider over the course of a four-year transition period (although he neglected to detail how that plan would be paid for).

Sanders’ plan has 16 co-sponsors, some of whom will likely be together on a primary debate stage in a few years, such as Senators Kamala Harris (California), Elizabeth Warren (Massachusetts), Cory Booker (New Jersey) and Kirsten Gillibrand (New York).

Regardless of the chances of this specific plan becoming a reality, to set the bar so far left signals that if Republicans can’t get something done on healthcare, the momentum that began in 2009 with Obamacare could snowball into an even more liberal, big-government healthcare system in America in the coming years.

This is exactly what conservative constitutionalists predicted if Obamacare was allowed to remain and Republicans failed to secure a full repeal.

In reviewing all the Republican plans up to this point, including this plan by Graham and Cassidy, it is obvious Republicans have no real desire or intention of securing a full repeal.

Instead, these charlatan politicians are putting forth yet another unconstitutional plan to fail passage in order to move with Democrats toward securing a single-payer government run health care system.

If that happens, the free-market health care system enjoyed in the united States will be gone.

And, yes, we are talking about the health care system, not just health care insurance;  there is a difference despite government shills trying to equate the two.

Citizens could face wait times for surgical procedures that extend to years instead of weeks.

Government will be deciding who is to receive critical care based on some hidden algorithm that could see treatable conditions denied based on demographics such as age, gender, individual productivity, etc.

In other words, government will determine whose life has value and whose does not.

It is a recipe to condone government-sanctioned genocide using the health care system.

Moreover, it is a way to control costs by denying life-saving procedures to individuals who the government views as burdens – Social Security/Medicare beneficiaries, disabled children, disabled veterans, disabled adults, individuals whose health care costs are extensive, etc.

No longer would individuals have the inherent right to life; but, individuals would be afforded life at the discretion of government.

At this point, American citizens are between a rock and a hard place.

If the Republican “Obamacare Lite 2.0” fails to pass, citizens are stuck with the imploding Obamacare opening the door for Democrats to push socialized, government controlled single-payer health care – not just healthcare insurance.

If the Republican plan passes, citizens are stuck with another disastrous, engineered to fail, health care insurance system leading into socialized, government controlled single-payer healthcare – not health care insurance.

This scenario is exactly why the full repeal of Obamacare and a return to the private sector industry for health care insurance was so important.

However, both parties are “on the wagon” for a health care system controlled by government.

It is the reason a full repeal of Obamacare has not materialized with the election of Donald Trump as president.

Moreover, it is the reason citizens will never again see health care or health care insurance in the hands of the private sector.

Without the full repeal of Obamacare and a return to health care insurance through the private sector free market system, individuals will forever be at the mercy of some type of government determining their provision of health care, whether that be through a government sponsored health care insurance coverage or single-payer government sanctioned health care system.

Either way, American citizens will lose the fundamental rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness where their health is concerned.

For such a steep price to pay – relinquishing of these important rights, what will citizens receive in return to justify the cost?

Sign-up to get breaking alerts from Sons of Liberty Media

Don't forget to like SonsOfLibertyMedia.com on Facebook, Google+, & Twitter.
The opinions expressed in each article are the opinions of the author alone and do not necessarily reflect those of SonsOfLibertyMedia.com.

Comment via Facebook
Comment via Disqus

Send this to a friend