You have reached your limit of free articles this month.

Enjoy unlimited access to myStatesman.com

Starting at just 99¢ for 8 weeks.

GREAT REASONS TO SUBSCRIBE TODAY!

  • IN-DEPTH REPORTING
  • INTERACTIVE STORYTELLING
  • NEW TOPICS & COVERAGE
  • ePAPER
X

You have read of premium articles.

Get unlimited access to all of our breaking news, in-depth coverage and bonus content- exclusively for subscribers. Starting at just 99¢ for 8 weeks

X

Welcome to myStatesman.com

This subscriber-only site gives you exclusive access to breaking news, in-depth coverage, exclusive interactives and bonus content.

You can read free articles of your choice a month that are only available on myStatesman.com.

More conservative than thou


In our ideologically scrambled age, it’s getting very hard to tell who’s who.

Political conservatives have been opposed to “socialized” medicine pretty much forever. Republicans who agreed with this philosophically paid a heavy political price as Democrats rolled out the “Mediscare” tactic every election season.

But how are we to make sense of the cross currents on the right regarding the American Health Care Act? The groups often associated with the “hard right,” such as the House Freedom Caucus, the Club for Growth, and Heritage Action, have panned the bill as “Obamacare 2.0.” Rep. Mark Sanford noted, “From a conservative’s perspective, there are a number of things that need further refinement. This notion of a refundable tax credit is a big deal; Medicaid expansion is a big deal; the Cadillac tax is a big deal.”

Cynics might note that some Republicans who publicly oppose the AHCA for not going far enough in a rightward direction are secretly hoping that the bill fails because Obamacare is actually reasonably popular with their voters.

The president, who is not a conservative, at first seemed to back the AHCA. “Our wonderful new Healthcare Bill is now out for review and negotiation. Obamacare is a complete and total disaster — is imploding fast!” he tweeted.

Fox News commentator Laura Ingraham lamented that the bill lacks the “Trumpiest” features of health care reform, and Breitbart — never subtle — is calling the bill “RyanCare.” What are the “Trumpy” features of health reform? Trump’s campaign promise of a replacement for Obamacare that would cover everyone and cost less was cotton candy.

The AHCA can be understood as that most reviled of creatures in Washington, D.C. — a compromise.

As a conservative, I would love a bill that actually created a free market in health care. We haven’t had one since before World War II when Congress made employer-provided (but not individually purchased) coverage tax deductible, and particularly since 1965 when Medicare and Medicaid were enacted. Congress further distorted the market in 1986 by requiring hospital emergency rooms to treat everyone regardless of ability to pay. Those costs were passed on in the form of higher medical bills for all. The third-party payer problem and government distortion of prices has resulted in medical inflation running twice the level of the Consumer Price Index for five decades. Everything government has done to make health care “affordable” has made it more expensive.

And as much as we might wish for a sword to cut the Gordian knot, the only politically possible options seem to be slow turns away from the single-payer precipice, perhaps in stages.

The AHCA takes some steps in that direction, particularly with the reform of Medicaid, the move toward health savings accounts, the repeal of $1 trillion in taxes and the revoking of the medical device tax. But compared with current law, the bill is hard on the working poor, and too generous to those at the upper end of the income scale. As health policy guru Avik Roy has objected, the subsidies the AHCA offers to those making between $75,000 and $150,000 are actually more generous than Obamacare’s subsidies. For the working poor, by contrast, who make too much to qualify for Medicaid, the subsidies would be much smaller and probably inadequate.

The rush to pass the AHCA — leadership had planned for a vote by next month — is based on political momentum, and that’s understandable. But Republicans would be well-advised to slow down and improve the bill.



Reader Comments ...


Next Up in Opinion

Letters to the editor: June 24, 2017
Letters to the editor: June 24, 2017

Re: June 16 photo, “1,100 boys try their hand at governing Texas.” I was dismayed on so many levels that the boys at Boys State, an event sponsored by the American Legion no less, voted for Texas to secede from the United States! Where are the idealistic thoughts of making this country a better nation? It speaks volumes about the environment...
Commentary: Language barrier shouldn’t be a barrier to democracy
Commentary: Language barrier shouldn’t be a barrier to democracy

Though voting should be a simple process, it’s undeniable that some people face more obstacles at the polls than others. When English is not your first language, the voting process can be especially difficult. Though a controversial voter ID law here has grabbed national headlines, fewer Texans know about the state’s more obscure voting...
Commentary: How Senate health bill raises health costs for everyone
Commentary: How Senate health bill raises health costs for everyone

As Congress wrestles with replacing the Affordable Care Act, a big question is where they will finally land with Medicaid. Rolling back Medicaid hurts our country’s safety net by taking coverage away from millions of Americans — many of whom are low-income, working adults who aren’t offered health insurance through their employers...
Commentary: Why Dawnna Dukes’ incumbency is misguiding Democrats
Commentary: Why Dawnna Dukes’ incumbency is misguiding Democrats

I was dismayed to read a broadside from Vincent Harding, chairman of the Travis County Democratic Party, purporting to explain his heavy-handed refusal to allow a vote on a resolution calling for the resignation of state Rep. Dawnna Dukes. That resolution might or might not have passed. That’s why votes are held. I’ve served five terms...
Letters to the editor: June 23, 2017
Letters to the editor: June 23, 2017

Re: June 15 article, “Austin requires a permit for kids’ lemonade stands. Troxclair wants to change that.” So, this is why there is a lag at City Hall. How much time and rhetoric energy have gone on about removal of this code? How much time was spent to make this a city code anyway? Now, the “department is in the process of...
More Stories