Repeal-and-replace is complicated
Kathleen Parker recognized the “reality” of healthy people not understanding why they should pay for health insurance that others get more benefit from, but surely this is a problem with education and communication, not an inherent weakness of the Affordable Care Act [“Don’t repeal, regroup,” op-ed, July 19].
All insurance systems are based on spreading risk; a large pool of participants sharing risks necessarily involves some who get no immediate benefit, some who get extensive benefit and many in between. Because no one can predict the future, one must participate before the need arises. This is fundamentally true not only for health insurance but also for automobile insurance, homeowners insurance, liability insurance, etc. No insurance system can function economically if only high-risk people participate.
The real problem, at the core, is the high cost of medical care in the United States, not the basic structure of insurance. Nothing in the Republican bills thus far deals with this basic issue. There are problems with the ACA, but there are also many benefits. We need real bipartisan discussion aimed at making improvements, not more inflamed rhetoric. Dennis Chamot, Burke
While the ironists
will float that the stupidly ignored Republican female senators effectively killed Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-Ky.) misbegotten Obamacare repeal, Trump loyalists among the citizenry will note once again that the “establishment,” such as it is, is both incapable of and undeserving of governing authority.
President Trump, with all of his character flaws and ineloquence, was sent to Washington to unclog the federal sewer. His supporters do not care about the Affordable Care Act except as an example of incompetent federal overreach, failed and impervious to correction by a clownish legislature.
Mr. Trump’s supporters remain perfectly sanguine that they sent the chaos president to preside over the circus that is the American governing class.
Jon Ketzner, Cumberland
What does repeal-and-replace
mean? Arguably, before the Trump campaign, House Speaker Paul D. Ryan’s (R-Wis.) policy pronouncements defined it. The Trump campaign changed that.
Repeal-and-replace means what candidate Donald Trump said it meant: cheaper, better, more comprehensive insurance available to all. Candidate Trump did not say cheaper for the federal government; he said cheaper and better for regular people. All President Trump needs to do is give his staff and Cabinet 20 clips from his rally speeches in which he defined repeal-and-replace and order that a bill comporting with his vision be drafted immediately. He then would be in a position to advocate for a bill that keeps his promises or to explain why his promises need adjusting. Tom Irvine, Lewes, Del.
Regarding E.J. Dionne
Jr.’s July 17 op-ed, “History is watching four senators”:
What about the 48 other Republican senators? How could any senator even consider voting for a plan that would remove more than 20 million people from health-insurance rolls? Twenty million Americans? That’s making America great again?
Where’s the plan that adds people to the rolls of the insured?
William “Billy” Eric Sahm, Washington