SE WI - Paul Ryan Town Hall

[T-roy Boy]

Paul Ryan (R) is a Congrassman for SE WI who is touring his counties discussing Health Care. This guy has done his homework. I was impressed with his speach, as well as how he handled the bantering Dems in the room. He even gave his actuaries a plug.

Here is his proposal - "Patients Choice Act" : http://www.house.gov/ryan/PCA/PCAsummary15p.pdf

He explained, very well, how there is a cost shift in the current system; The tax implications to small businesses; and the three things that really need to be fixed:
1) The Uninsured
2) Price Transparency (let the providers compete)
3) Prioritizing Healthy Lifestyles and Preventing Disease

the only thing I wish he would consistently say is "Health Care" and not "Health Insurance". He used both statements interchangably.

I cannot believe how much Democrats, at least the ones in the room with me, do not understand how health care and health insurance work. They seriously think they should be free.

[C8 Guy]

I saw him on one of the Sunday morning shows this weekend and had the same positive impression of him.

[Dr T Non-Fan]

Originally Posted by T-roy Boy

3) Prioritizing Healthy Lifestyles and Preventing Disease

Lucky him, he doesn't run a healthy food store. He'd be getting boycotted.
How does that healthy lifestyle bit play in the Meat/Potatoes/Cheese Belt?

[Smurf]

Originally Posted by Dr T Non-Fan

Lucky him, he doesn't run a healthy food store. He'd be getting boycotted.
How does that healthy lifestyle bit play in the Meat/Potatoes/Cheese Belt?

"Homer, all that fat can't be good for you."

"Don't worry Marge. The beer will melt all that fat away."

Lots of beer in Wisconsin. So what's the problem?

[Dr T Non-Fan]

Next thing he has to comprehend is to separate the two main segments of the uninsured, as the solutions to getting them insured are different:
1. Uninsurable, due to pre-ex.
2. Insurable, but cannot afford it.

Gov't can have #1, or pay extraordinary amounts of premium for insurers to cover them. Either way, we all pay a lot.

Insurers will take #2, as long as someone pays for it. Might not be as expensive as one thinks. Expanding Medicaid might work, and if insurers are contracted to keep costs down (oh, when providers agree to lower Medicaid charges, they do it by getting insurers to agree to higher charges on commercial).

[Dr T Non-Fan]

Originally Posted by Smurf

"Homer, all that fat can't be good for you."

"Don't worry Marge. The beer will melt all that fat away."

Lots of beer in Wisconsin. So what's the problem?

This logic is unbreakable! Is there anything that Homer can't ffix?

[MountainHawk]

Originally Posted by Dr T Non-Fan

Next thing he has to comprehend is to separate the two main segments of the uninsured, as the solutions to getting them insured are different:
1. Uninsurable, due to pre-ex.
2. Insurable, but cannot afford it.

Gov't can have #1, or pay extraordinary amounts of premium for insurers to cover them. Either way, we all pay a lot.

Insurers will take #2, as long as someone pays for it. Might not be as expensive as one thinks. Expanding Medicaid might work, and if insurers are contracted to keep costs down (oh, when providers agree to lower Medicaid charges, they do it by getting insurers to agree to higher charges on commercial).

You missed 'insurable, but don't want to pay for it.'

[FormLetter]

Originally Posted by Dr T Non-Fan

Next thing he has to comprehend is to separate the two main segments of the uninsured, as the solutions to getting them insured are different:
1. Uninsurable, due to pre-ex.
2. Insurable, but cannot afford it.

Gov't can have #1, or pay extraordinary amounts of premium for insurers to cover them. Either way, we all pay a lot.

Insurers will take #2, as long as someone pays for it. Might not be as expensive as one thinks. Expanding Medicaid might work, and if insurers are contracted to keep costs down (oh, when providers agree to lower Medicaid charges, they do it by getting insurers to agree to higher charges on commercial).

Eh, everybody is insurable, just not necessarily at a cost they themselves can afford.

Where and how do you draw the line between groups 1 and 2 in your post? I can the line being drawn so that the sickest 0.01% fall into group 1, with the remaining 99.99% in group 2. Then the private insurers do things until it is 0.1%/99.9%, gradually making things more and more unaffordable for the sickest people in group 1.

I can picture a [hopefully state-by-state] risk-adjuster system like in Medicare Advantage where there are special classes of people for which insurers can be compensated by the state. (Think of the ESRDs in MA.)

[erosewater]

Originally Posted by Dr T Non-Fan

Lucky him, he doesn't run a healthy food store. He'd be getting boycotted.
How does that healthy lifestyle bit play in the Beer/Cheese/Deep-fried Twinkies Belt?

IFYP

[T-roy Boy]

At one point I interpreted some of his comments about the chronic people having some sort or reinsurance pool that all insurance companies are required to pay something for. He would tax the insurance companies that have less than average "book risk" than others. I could barely hear this pretty important part of his speech due to the couple in front of me arguing back and forth. It should be posted somewhere in his plan.