I guess not. A writer in (at?) Vox muses plaintively, "The problem here is that the Republican Party [...] somehow ram through a quickly-crafted replacement that would massively restructure the health care sector with hardly any deliberation, with potentially catastrophic consequences."
Gosh, do you suppose he was this upset the last time one party held the Presidency, dominated both houses of Congress, and "massively restructre[d] the health care sector" via legislation they hadn't even read? Was he worried about a bill Congress was told they had to pass in order to find out what was in it?
Or was it okay-fine as long as the Right People were in charge?
Me, I'm still wondering what in the name of Hippocrates the Fed.Gov is doing in the health care business at all, other than Congressthings and Presidents showing up at charity efforts to raise money for those unable to care for themselves.
Somebody's going to call me out on that, huffing that I'm suggesting Big Business ought to be running healthcare. (Like they're not? Who do you think my Congressbeings are most likely to take calls from, me or Eli Lilly? Me, or United Healthcare?) Nope; there was a time when healthcare was mostly run by doctors and it worked pretty well. In part, that was because they couldn't do a whole lot to keep you alive, for $$$$$ levels of "keeping." But it was also because administrative overhead was low and medical decisions were made by (hang on, this is far-out stuff) working physicians. Health insurance, in the form of "catastrophic" coverage, mostly for hospitalization, didn't start showing up as a workplace perk until wage-frozen WW II: if an employer couldn't pay more than the competing blivet works, they could offer other incentives, and employers did so. It has grown from there. especially with the 1990s realization that there were a number of aliments for which prevention was much cheaper than treatment, and thus we came to where we were before the Affordable Care Act.
At the time, Congressional Democrats chortled that ACA was "unrepealable." Now, maybe not so much.
We have a mess now. Maybe there's a bigger mess coming. Maybe it will be a huge, terrific* improvement. Whatever happens, don't expect there to be any less paperwork or any shortage of spatting in the press and in Washington, D.C. -- and how, exactly, does the filling out of forms or spirited debate set your broken leg, treat your infection or get you on a program of exercise to squeeze a few more years from your ill-treated heart? --And why can't I get an appointment with my doctor any sooner than the middle of next month?
* "Terrific" and "Terrible" share the same root, of course.
8 months ago