Smile! You’ve Got Socialized Healthcare!

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
66
48
Minnesota: Gopher State




Let's see if those "socialist" beneficiaries will back up their so called principles with action. ;)
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton

DaSleeper

Trolling Hypocrites
May 27, 2007
33,676
1,666
113
Northern Ontario,
You are making the assumption that Republicans can actually understand statistics. They certainly don't when it comes to climate change and economics.
You shouldn't post when you drink....I was talking about planned parenthood and demographics and racism....
What has that to do with climate change?
You're starting to sound like megahurts......
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
You shouldn't post when you drink....I was talking about planned parenthood and demographics and racism....
What has that to do with climate change?
You're starting to sound like megahurts......

Read my post again. My reference compared the general lack of understanding of Republicans on major issues with their denial of climate change. Don't try reading posts when you are napping.
 

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
66
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
Hospitals warn Republicans of 'unprecedented public health crisis' from Obamacare repeal


Repealing Obamacare is going to be a disaster on just about every level: for individuals, for state and local governments, for healthcare providers and insurers, and thus for the politicians who are doing it. That's the message that the insurance industry has been giving President-popular-vote-loser-elect Trump and congressional Republicans. Now the nation's hospitals are putting a number on it: at least $165 billion in losses, just to hospitals, in the next decade unless something equally as good replaces it.

The two main trade groups for U.S. hospitals dispatched a letter to the incoming president and Capitol Hill’s top four leaders, saying that the government should help hospitals avoid massive financial losses if the law is rescinded in a way that causes a surge of uninsured patients.
The letter, along with a consultant’s study estimating the financial impact of undoing the Affordable Care Act, makes hospitals the first sector of the health-care industry to speak out publicly to try to protect itself from a sharp reversal in health policy that Trump is promising and congressional Republicans have long favored. […]

[T]he American Hospital Association and the Federation of American Hospitals (FAH) convened a news conference Tuesday to release the study’s findings and draw attention to their concerns. […]

Joann Anderson, president of Southeastern Health, a financially fragile rural hospital in Lumberton, N.C., one of that state’s most economically depressed areas, said the prospect of repealing the health law without a replacement to keep people insured is “gut-wrenching. . . . We cannot take additional cuts.”
The study used the only thing available for its analysis, the repeal bill Republicans pushed through this January, vetoed by President Obama. Since in the intervening year, Republicans haven't come up with a scrap of anything else, this is what they're going with. That bill, since it had to pass through budget reconciliation to avoid a filibuster from Senate Democrats, stayed on the taxing and spending parts of the law and eliminated the federal subsidies for people purchasing private insurance on the exchanges, the penalties for individuals and employers who don't comply with its coverage mandates, and the Medicaid expansion in 31 states.

Without any of that, the entire thing crumbles and we go back to a situation at least as bad as pre-law, and for hospitals even worse. That's because the law also enacted cuts to hospitals treating uninsured patients on the assumption that there wouldn't be huge numbers of people without insurance needing treatment. If those cuts are restored (and fat chance they would be with Paul Ryan in charge) there's an addition $102 billion in losses, just to hospitals.

And there's a lot of hospitals closing, particularly rural ones. Which means lots more people—both insured and uninsured—without a place to go when they get sick or injured. The scope of the looming disaster with repeal is hard to fathom, and it's not going to be contained to the 20 million who are going to lose coverage. It's going to be everybody. If you throw in Medicare privatization and Medicaid being turned into a block grant, there won't be very many people who can afford health insurance, and a lot of employers who won't be able to provide it affordably either. And Republicans have absolutely no idea of how to fix that.




Hospitals warn Republicans of 'unprecedented public health crisis' from Obamacare repeal





Still waiting for the Republican alternative plan ...
 

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
66
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
On the contrary, death rate will be increased if ACA is ended:


GOP Obamacare repeal will be an annual death sentence for thousands











Republican political spite will have a staggering body count.



The ink from President Obama's signature on the Affordable Care Act wasn't even dry when then-Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell unveiled the Republican mantra for the upcoming midterm elections. As he put it on March 23, 2010, "I think the slogan will be 'repeal and replace', 'repeal and replace.'"

Now, almost seven years later, McConnell and his Republican allies are finding out just how difficult their simplistic Obamacare proposition will really be. With Donald Trump weeks away from defiling the Oval Office, congressional Republicans are no closer to a replacement plan for the roughly 25 million people they will soon add to the ranks of the uninsured. "Repeal and replace" has become "repeal and delay."

Meanwhile, worried House and Senate Republicans are getting an earful from almost every corner of the American health care industry. Having already asked a federal judge to postpone action on the House GOP lawsuit challenging cost-sharing payments for 7 million Americans, Republicans have received dire warnings from health insurers about the death spiral their individual market will experience if no Obamacare replacement is immediately forthcoming. Hospitals have also alerted President-elect Trump and Congress that many of them will face financial ruin as millions of newly uninsured Americans once again require uncompensated care. While American Medical Association (AMA) President Andrew Gorman declared "a core principle is that any new reform proposal should not cause individuals currently covered to become uninsured," new assessments this week from ACASignups.net and the Urban Institute forecast that will be the fate for up to 29 million people who obtained coverage thanks to Obamacare. It's no wonder even Republican voters are losing their appetite for repeal.

Oh, and one other thing: Recent research suggests that the Republican repeal of President Obama's landmark health care law will result in tens of thousands of Americans needlessly dying every year.

This discussion of the American health care system's body count isn't a new one. In a 2002 study, the Institute of Medicine estimated that 18,000 Americans died in 2000 because they lacked health insurance. In January 2008, a study by the Urban Institute ("Uninsured and Dying Because of It") didn't just conclude that "the absence of health insurance creates a range of consequences, including lower quality of life, increased morbidity and mortality, and higher financial burdens." The national death toll, it found, was rising: "137,000 people died from 2000 through 2006 because they lacked health insurance, including 22,000 people in 2006." By 2012, Families USA ("Dying for Coverage: The Deadly Consequences of Being Uninsured") concluded that "uninsured adults are at least 25 percent more likely to die prematurely than adults who have private insurance" and found that "26,100 people between the ages of 25 and 64 who died prematurely due to a lack of health insurance in 2010." A 2009 analysis by Harvard Medical School and Cambridge Medical Alliance was gloomier still, warning "uninsured, working-age Americans have 40 percent higher death risk than privately insured counterparts." All told, the Harvard study lamented, each year "nearly 45,000 annual deaths are associated with lack of health insurance." That kind of horrifying data, along with a dramatic shift of health costs to individuals and families as employers curtailed or dropped coverage, helped propel the passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in 2010. (Nevertheless, that didn't stop Republicans from George W. Bush, Tom Delay, and Mitch McConnell to Mitt Romney and Phil Bryant to complain before and after Obamacare became law that "no one goes without health care" because "you just go to an emergency room.")

But with the Supreme Court ruling in the 2012 case of NFIB v. Sebelius, the issue of death by lack of insurance resurfaced. States, the Roberts Court declared, could refuse to expand Medicaid coverage as Obamacare originally required. Without the mandate to extend the joint federal/state insurance program to those earning up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL), 19 states decided to opt out. The predictable result, beginning in 2014, was a "coverage gap" which left millions of people uninsured. As the New York Times reminded readers again this week, those stuck in the gap in the non-expanding states earned too much to qualify for free Medicaid and too little to qualify for subsidies to purchase private insurance on the Obamacare exchanges. As Janet Foy, a Missouri resident caught in the GOP coverage gap put it this week:

"I'll take my chances with dying, if that's what it comes down to. We have no money."
In 2014, another team of researchers from Harvard Medical School warned in Health Affairs that a lot of Americans—almost 7.8 million—would find themselves in Ms. Foy's situation. The authors of "Opting Out Of Medicaid Expansion: The Health And Financial Impacts" tallied up the coming body count in the Republican states that rejected the ACA's extension of Medicaid to millions of their residents:

Nationwide, 47,950,687 people were uninsured in 2012; the number of uninsured is expected to decrease by about 16 million after implementation of the ACA, leaving 32,202,633 uninsured. Nearly 8 million of these remaining uninsured would have gotten coverage had their state opted in. States opting in to Medicaid expansion will experience a decrease of 48.9 percent in their uninsured population versus an 18.1 percent decrease in opt-out states...
We estimate the number of deaths attributable to the lack of Medicaid expansion in opt-out states at between 7,115 and 17,104. Medicaid expansion in opt-out states would have resulted in 712,037 fewer persons screening positive for depression and 240,700 fewer individuals suffering catastrophic medical expenditures. Medicaid expansion in these states would have resulted in 422,553 more diabetics receiving medication for their illness, 195,492 more mammograms among women age 50-64 years and 443,677 more pap smears among women age 21-64. Expansion would have resulted in an additional 658,888 women in need of mammograms gaining insurance, as well as 3.1 million women who should receive regular pap smears.
The Republicans' killer math netted out this way: of the 7,781,829 left uninsured, the authors estimated between 7,115 (0.091 percent) and 17,104 (0.220 percent)) would die for no reason other than political spite.

But Sam Dickman, David Himmelstein, Danny McCormick, and Steffie Woolhandler weren't the only researchers trying to understand the carnage from policymakers' failure to enable health insurance coverage. As Ian Milhiser wrote in February 2015, another study counted up the bodies by reverse engineering the 2006 health care reform law in Massachusetts. During the 2015 King v. Burwell case that tried (and failed) to end insurance subsidies for those obtaining coverage in states with federal Obamacare exchanges, ACA supporters pointed to a 2014 study titled, "Changes in Mortality after Massachusetts Health Care Reform: A Quasi-experimental Study:"

A brief filed on behalf of multiple public health scholars and the American Public Health Association, estimates that "over 9,800 additional Americans" will die if the justices side with the King plaintiffs. It reaches this conclusion by starting with an Urban Institute study showing that 8.2 million people will become uninsured in this scenario. As other research examining Obamacare-like reforms in the state of Massachusetts found that "for every 830 adults gaining insurance coverage there was one fewer death per year," that translates to between 9,800 and 9,900 deaths if the justices back the plaintiffs in King.
That 0.120 percent ratio—one unnecessary death for each 830 adults losing insurance—represents a middle ground in forecasting the lives wasted by killing Obamacare. While actuarial tables will doubtless vary based on the ages of those losing insurance and their source of insurance (generally poorer and undertreated on Medicaid), we can nevertheless get some ballpark figures for the death toll among those to be denied coverage by the new Republican monolith in Washington.

According to Daily Kos' own Brainwrap, the newly uninsured in President Trump's America will be a gigantic group. All told, the real Charles Gaba estimates with his state-by-state breakdowns, 23.1 million—or 7.2 percent of the entire population—will lose insurance as a result of the complete. immediate repeal of Obamacare in the spring of 2017. That figure includes 12.3 million who gained coverage through the expansion of Medicaid and around 9 million receiving subsidies to purchase private insurance on the ACA marketplaces. Another 1.4 million young adults under age 26 would be left without coverage, as would 470,000 still purchasing "basic health plans" grandfathered under Obamacare.

As the table at the top shows, the Grim Reaper Republicans would sentence thousands of Americans to death every year. Applying the low (0.091 percent), medium (0.120 percent) and high (0.220 percent) mortality rates from the 2012 and 2014 studies, the needless deaths among Gaba's 23.1 million newly uninsured would range between 21,148 and 50,852.

As shocking as those numbers are, the body count is even higher if Republicans choose to repeal Obamacare but delay its implementation. That's the conclusion of a new analysis released this week by the Urban Institute. In "Implications of Partial Repeal of the ACA through Reconciliation," Linda J. Blumberg, Matthew Buettgens, and John Holahan compared "future health care coverage and government health care spending under the ACA and under passage of a reconciliation bill similar to one vetoed in January 2016." Their top-line findings:

The number of uninsured people would rise from 28.9 million to 58.7 million in 2019, an increase of 29.8 million people (103 percent). The share of nonelderly people without insurance would increase from 11 percent to 21 percent, a higher rate of uninsurance than before the ACA because of the disruption to the nongroup insurance market.
Of the 29.8 million newly uninsured, 22.5 million people become uninsured as a result of eliminating the premium tax credits, the Medicaid expansion, and the individual mandate. The additional 7.3 million people become uninsured because of the near collapse of the nongroup insurance market.
"This scenario does not just move the country back to the situation before the ACA," they concluded, "It moves the country to a situation with higher uninsurance rates than was the case before the ACA's reforms."


The GOP’s “repeal and delay” will leave American health care in worse shape than before the ACA.
That grotesque outcome would be perverse result of the path Republicans in Congress are now plotting to pursue in their "repeal and delay" approach to Obamacare. As Ian Milhiser explains, gutting the regulatory aspects of the 2010 Affordable Care Act, such as the requirement that insurers cover people with pre-existing health conditions, are subject to filibuster and thus effectively require 60 votes in the Senate.

Meanwhile, legislation repealing the law's fiscal provisions -- including the Medicaid expansion, tax credits that help people pay their health premiums, and the law's individual mandate (which charges higher income taxes to people without insurance) -- can be enacted by a simple majority through a process known as 'reconciliation." For this reason, Senate Republicans are considering repeal of just the fiscal provisions in order to overcome a Democratic filibuster.
Repealing only these provisions, however, would actually be worse for Americans in the individual health insurance market than a total repeal of the law. That's because the law's provisions protecting people with preexisting health conditions cannot operate without the tax credits and the individual mandate.

The mandate, in particular, is essential because it encourages people to purchase health insurance before they become sick. Without it, many healthy individuals will wait until they are sick to buy insurance, effectively draining all the money out of an insurance pool they haven't paid into. Eventually, many insurance pools would simply collapse.
That is why the Urban Institute warns that President Trump, Senate Minority Leader McConnell, and House Speaker Paul Ryan are poised to make American health care worse than it was prior to President Obama's signing of the Affordable Care Act in March 2010. It's why the health insurance industry, the hospital industry, and the AMA are all raising red flags. And the GOP's scorched-earth campaign destined to lay waste to American health care has led Brian Beutler to counsel Republicans that "the alternative to Obamacare is Obamacare." Kevin Drum's warning went a step further: "Obamacare repeal is doomed."

Alas, Kevin Drum is probably underestimating the depth of the almost bottomless well of Republican political spite. Despite the fact that Uncle Sam was picking up nearly the entire tab for Medicaid expansion, 19 GOP-controlled states still said no. They didn't just condemn thousands of their residents to early graves, but jeopardized state budgets and hospitals while doing it. Florida Sen. Marco Rubio led Congressional Republicans in stripping billions of dollars in guaranteed risk adjustment funding for Obamacare insurers, despite the fact that Medicare (including Medicare Advantage for private insurers) has been using them for year. Almost 900,000 people lost their existing coverage as a result, as nonprofit co-ops were wiped out and many insurers bailed on markets across the country (especially in rural areas). And even as they promise to repeal Obamacare "root and branch," the Republicans don't really mean it. The $879 billion in savings the Affordable Care Act extracted from Medicare insurers and providers between 2016 and 2025 isn't going away: Paul Ryan, Georgia Rep. Tom Price, and friends as always are planning to redirect to massive tax cuts for the wealthy.


As always, health care is generally worst where Republicans poll best.

During the 2012 presidential campaign, RNC chairman and incoming Trump chief of staff Reince Priebus regurgitated a tried and untrue GOP talking point. President Obama, Priebus falsely charged, "stole $700 billion from Medicare to fund Obamacare" before adding:

"If any person in this entire debate has blood on their hands in regard to Medicare, it's Barack Obama."
After all the Republicans' killer lies about "death panels" and a "government takeover of health care" and "pulling the plug on grandma," Priebus' "blood on their hands" slander is perhaps the most vicious of all. Barack Obama and his Democratic Party made it possible for some 25 million Americans to obtain health insurance. Now as Donald Trump prepares to take the oath of office, GOP leaders are scheming to take it away from all of those people—and likely even more. Even if the grim math is overhyped, discussing a body count 60,000 or 40,000 or 20,000 dead Americans is an obscenity. Voting Republican, as Mitch McConnell once said of a public health insurance option for Obamacare, "may cost you your life." If Trump, McConnell, and Ryan repeal Obamacare, let there be no doubt who has blood on their hands.
 

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
66
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
With Obamacare repealed, 1 in 4 adults could be uninsurable due to a pre-existing condition



At least one in four U.S. adults could be uninsurable due to a pre-existing condition in the wake of a repeal of the Affordable Care Act, according to an estimate by the nonprofit Kaiser Family Foundation released Monday. Those adults, or about 52 million people, have a current or past diagnosis that could allow health insurers to refuse them health coverage, the Kaiser analysis found.

Most adults get health insurance through their employer or public programs and are thus shielded from this aspect of the health insurance industry. But others, including self-employed people, lower-wage workers, early retirees and those in need of coverage in-between life changes, seek coverage on the individual insurance market.

The “vast majority” of that 52 million population is covered through their employer or public programs, according to the Kaiser report. But if any of those people lost insurance because of unemployment, divorce, turning 26 or another reason, their pre-existing condition would become an even bigger problem.

The scope of what has been considered a pre-existing condition can be shocking. Before the ACA, excludable pre-existing conditions included people who had diabetes, obesity or mental disorders (including being bipolar or having an eating disorder) or had been treated for alcohol or drug abuse, the Kaiser report shows.

With Obamacare repealed, 1 in 4 adults could be uninsurable due to a pre-existing condition





Republican death panels are on their way!
 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
96
48
USA
Party is OVER Gopher!

I just hope Obamacare hasn't damaged the Health Care System too much.

OVER!

Government Releases Obamacare Premium Levels for 36 More States


Yup - lower costs, better coverage, more lives saved.

From 2013... what a FAIL
 

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
66
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
Obamacare demand so high, administration extends the deadline to meet it


Suck on this, Republicans. An “extraordinary volume of consumers” contacting call centers and logging on to Healthcare.gov has prompted the government to extend the enrollment deadline until midnight Monday, Dec. 19 for coverage starting Jan. 1.

Healthcare.gov CEO Kevin Counihan said that many consumers were asked to wait before signing up for health insurance both online and over the phone. “Nearly a million consumers have left their contact information to hold their place in line,” he said in a statement late Thursday night. “Our goal is to provide affordable coverage to everyone seeking it before the deadline, and these two additional business days will give consumers an opportunity to come back and complete their enrollment for January 1 coverage.”
That covers people in the 39 states that use the federal exchange, Healthcare.gov. And three of the states that operate their own—California, Connecticut, and New York—also have extended deadlines, but just to Saturday, Dec. 17. Three states—Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Washington State—are keeping enrollments open until Friday, Dec. 23.

And if you can't meet those deadlines, you still have 46 days to sign up. The final deadline for 2017 coverage is Jan. 31.

So guess what, Republicans? There's huge demand for health insurance out there. You're now completely in charge of having to figure out how to meet it. Good luck with that.





Obamacare demand so high, administration extends the deadline to meet it
 

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
66
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
Obamacare boasts biggest day ever Thursday on HealthCare.gov

More people signed up for insurance on HealthCare.gov on Thursday than any time since the launch of the Affordable Care Act exchanges three years ago, President Obama announced Friday.

More than 670,000 people signed up for coverage ahead of the Dec. 15 deadline for Jan. 1 coverage. And that's despite the fact about 1 million people had to leave their contact information as they couldn't get on the site. About 600,000 people signed up last year on Dec. 15.

The traffic jam prompted the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to announce late Thursday that the deadline for enrollment on the federal exchange was extended until 11:59 PM PST on Dec. 19. HealthCare.gov handles enrollment for 38 states. Deadlines for state exchanges vary, but several allow enrollment for Jan. 1 coverage for a few more days.

Signups rose steadily this week. On Monday, more than 325,000 Americans selected plans on HealthCare.gov. On Tuesday, more than 380,000 Americans selected plans on HealthCare.gov, marking two of the biggest days in HealthCare.gov history.

Obamacare boasts biggest day ever Thursday on Healthcare.gov
 

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
66
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
Millions more can afford to see a doctor under Obamacare, so that was nice while it lasted


Here's what Republicans are threatening to repeal during Congress’ first days back in session in January.

The Affordable Care Act’s historic expansion of health insurance coverage has brought medical care within reach of millions of Americans who previously couldn’t afford it, new research shows.
The share of adults who skipped medical care because of costs dropped by nearly one-fifth between 2013 and 2015, according to a report from the Commonwealth Fund.

The gains were even more dramatic in the states that have most expanded coverage through the federal healthcare law, often called Obamacare.

“The Affordable Care Act’s health insurance coverage expansions are working to get people covered and help them afford healthcare,” said Sara Collins, vice president of the fund, a New York-based foundation that studies healthcare systems around the world.

“We know that health insurance is essential for people to get the care they need,” Collins said. “In this time of uncertainty about the ACA, it’s important to keep in mind the financial and health protection health insurance provides for families.”
Even people who stupidly voted for Trump know that the ACA is essential for their financial and physical health. Too bad they were only hearing the "make America white" again message he was sending, and ignored that "I'm going to repeal Obamacare" part.

In 2013, 16 percent of adults reported that they had skipped going to a doctor because of costs. That was down to 13 percent last year. That's a pretty big reduction in just two years’ time. There was a 7 percent drop in people reporting they couldn't afford care—from 19 to 12—in Kentucky, the state that had the most success in decreasing the number of uninsured. States that didn't expand Medicaid, though, continued to lag: "In Mississippi, 19% of adults reported skipping care in 2015 because of cost. In Texas, it was 18%. And in Alabama and Florida, the rate was 17%."

But now, thanks to Republicans, all the rest of the states are going to be like Mississippi again.




Millions more can afford to see a doctor under Obamacare, so that was nice while it lasted
 

tay

Hall of Fame Member
May 20, 2012
11,548
1
36
Here's a rather telling—and terrifying—glimpse into the mind of a Republican thinking about health insurance and health care reform.
The example Rep. Bill Huizenga (R-MI) gave in an interview with MLive.com was from his own experience when he waited until the morning after to take his youngest son to the doctor with an injured arm, because he did not want to waste money on an expensive emergency room visit.


The arm, it turned out, was broken.

"We weren't sure what was going on. It was in the evening, so I splinted it up and we wrapped it up, and the decision was, okay, do we go to the ER? We thought it was a sprain, but weren't sure," Huizenga said, adding that he and his wife "took every precaution and decided to go in the next morning."

Okay, we'll stop there for a second.

He made his youngest son suffer overnight with a broken arm—and he must have had a clue that it was broken since he splinted it—rather than go to the ER. His child. With a broken arm.


We continue.
He offered the example to explain his view that health care consumers should shoulder more of the financial responsibilities, instead of the current health system, which he said "continue to squeeze providers." […]


"Way too often, people pull out their insurance card and they say 'I don't know the difference or cost between an X-ray or an MRI or CT Scan.' I might make a little different decision if I did know [what] some of those costs were and those costs came back to me," he said.
Yes, he was doing the fiscally prudent—even virtuous—thing by refusing to have his kid's broken limb seen to immediately (leading to who knows how much in future therapist bills for the kid to resolve that trauma.) Set aside the horrifying glimpse this provides into Huizenga's family life—he's falling back on that old "personal responsibility" bull**** Republicans love so much that says the whole reason health care costs so much is because people use it. So who has to be punished in this scenario? The patient.


Flashback seven years as Steve Benen has done, and rehear the words of former House Majority Leader Dick Armey: "The largest empirical problem we have in health care today is too many people are too over-insured." And here's two other former GOP congressmen, John Shadegg and Pete Hoekstra: "When was the last time you asked your doctor how much it would cost for a necessary test or procedure?"

That's how they tried to shape the debate back in 2009, when the reform effort was getting off the ground: by making sure that people didn't get too much health care. Not that costs were too high because costs were just too damned high, but that irrational demand—for health care!—was the problem. And in seven years they've learned nothing. Like how real reform can take a big bite out of the rise in health care costs. Which Obamacare has done.

The problem with Obamacare was that it just didn't punish those people, the people Republicans hate. The ones who elected them. Oh, and their own children, apparently.